伪造货币罪若干疑难问题例解

以实践中疑难案件为例,探讨伪造货币罪在司法认定中的若干疑难问题,比如伪造缅甸元之类外币、代币券、外币有价证券能否构成伪造货币罪,伪造方法、假币逼真度是否影响定罪量刑,制造、贩卖货币版样行为应如何处理。     

Excessive Uniformity in Federal Drug Sentencing

The ideal of fair and proportionate punishment was a major impetus for federal sentencing reform. Observers of the current federal drug sentencing regime contend that the sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimums lead to the problem of “excessive uniformity” in which offenders of widely differing culpability receive similar sentences due to the dominance of drug quantity as a sentencing factor. This study investigates this phenomenon using the 1997 Survey of Inmates in Federal Correctional Facilities. Controlling for relevant offense, offender, and case processing variables, the analysis finds that the quantity-driven sentencing fails to account for important differences in offender culpability—resulting in excessively uniform sentences for offenders with highly dissimilar roles in the offense. The main policy implication of this research is that the central, organizing role of drug quantity in federal drug sentencing needs to be rethought. Indeed, effectively dealing with the problem of excessive uniformity will likely require the wholesale restructuring of how federal sentences for drug offenders are determined.

当前我国刑事和解的现状及完善进路

随着2012年我国《刑事诉讼法》的修订,刑事和解制度在我国真正实现了"有法可依"。自2013年《刑事诉讼法》正式实施以来,刑事和解制度在司法实践中出现了"花钱买刑"、司法机关滥用职权、民族地区效果不佳等问题,针对此类问题从立法和司法制度建构上均应作出进一步的完善。应从适用条件、范围的明确到办案机制、回访机制、主持方式等方面开拓出刑事和解制度的完善进路,以期我国刑事和解制度健康有效地运行和发展。     

THE JUVENILE PENALTY: A COMPARISON OF JUVENILE AND YOUNG ADULT SENTENCING OUTCOMES IN CRIMINAL COURT*

This study uses criminal court data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) to investigate the sentencing of juvenile offenders processed in adult criminal court by comparing their sentencing outcomes to those of young adult offenders in similar situations. Because the expanded juvenile exclusion and transfer policies of the 1990s have led to an increase in the number of juveniles convicted in adult courts, we argue that it is critical to better understand the judicial decision making processes involved. We introduce competitive hypotheses on the relative leniency or severity of sentencing outcomes for transferred juveniles and interpret our results with the focal concerns theoretical perspective on sentencing. Our findings indicate that juvenile offenders in adult court are sentenced more severely than their young adult counterparts. Moreover, findings suggest that juvenile status interacts with and conditions the effects of other important sentencing factors including offense type, offense severity and prior criminal record. We discuss these results as they relate to immediate outcomes for transferred juveniles, criminal court processes in general and the broader social implications for juvenile justice policy concerning the transfer of juveniles to criminal court.     

A Meta-Analysis of Race and Sentencing Research: Explaining the Inconsistencies

Numerous studies have addressed the question: Are African-Americans treated more harshly than similarly situated whites? This research employs meta-analysis to synthesize this body of research. One-hundred-sixteen statistically independent contrasts were coded from 71 published and unpublished studies. Coded study and contextual features are used to explain variation in research findings. Analyses indicate that African-Americans generally are sentenced more harshly than whites; the magnitude of this race effect is statistically significant but small and highly variable. Larger estimates of unwarranted disparity are found in contrasts that examine drug offenses, imprisonment or discretionary decisions, do not pool cases from several smaller jurisdictions, utilize imprecise measures, or omit key variables. Yet, even when consideration is confined to those contrasts employing key controls and precise measures of key variables, unwarranted racial disparities persists. Further, a substantial proportion of variability in study results is explained by study factors, particularly methodological factors.     

“从技术到制度”：我国量刑程序改革述论

中国的量刑程序改革需要"从技术到制度"逐步推进.具体而言第一,确立量刑听证,实现量刑的"司法化";第二,制定量刑指南,推进量刑的"精密化";第三,革新量刑技术,促进量刑的"现代化";第四,公开量刑过程及理由,保证量刑的"透明化".     

The Last Word in Court—A Hidden Disadvantage for the Defense

In the legal systems of most western countries, defense attorneys present their sentencing recommendation after the prosecution has presented its sentencing demands. This procedural sequence for criminal cases is intended to balance the impact of both parties on the judge's final decision. Especially the positioning of the defense's plea at the end of the trial follows the fundamental legal principle “in dubio pro reo.” Research on judgmental anchoring, however, suggests that the standard procedural sequence may in fact work against this principle. Consistent with this implication, the present studies demonstrate that the defense's sentencing recommendation is anchored on, and consequently assimilated toward, the preceding recommendation by the prosecution. This influence prevents the defense attorney from effectively counterbalancing the prosecutor's demand. Instead, the biased defense attorney's recommendation partially mediates the impact of the prosecutor's demand on the judge's decision. These findings suggest that the standard procedural sequence in court may place the defense at a distinct disadvantage.     

Analytical Rigor in Studies of Disparities in Criminal Case Processing

Studies of racial/ethnic disparities in criminal case processing have yielded mixed results. Some differences in findings have probably resulted from analyses of different social settings, but some could be attributable to differences in analytical rigor between studies. Contextual analyses are pointless unless the research yields unbiased estimates of the true relationships between a defendant's race/ethnicity and case dispositions. This goal may be furthered by conducting analyses that simultaneously incorporate the following: (a) corrections for sample bias, (b) analyses of several stages of case processing, (c) measures of prior record and offense seriousness which maximize explained variation in the dependent variables examined, (d) statistical controls for extralegal variables that correlate with case dispositions, and (e) more rigorous statistical tests for interactions. To demonstrate potential differences in findings from analyses with and without these characteristics, results from a study of 1586 Mexican- and Anglo-American defendants from Dona Ana County, New Mexico, are presented.     

检察一体化目的论

目的定位是检察一体化建构与运行中的重大理论问题,目的取向直接指导着中国检察一体化的建构及其运行,并决定着其建构与实施的成效。围绕检察一体化目的的争论在国外可谓众说纷纭,虽各有其解释力,但也有明显缺陷,都无法为中国所取。其实,检察一体化目的是国家建构和适用检察一体化机制所追求的效果,有着直接目的和根本目的之分,其直接目的在于实现国家刑罚权与保障公民基本人权,而其根本目的则在于保障刑事法治与社会和谐。     

我国公诉制度改革若干问题探讨

我国的公诉制度有必要通过正在进行的刑事诉讼法再修改实行以下三项重要改革：1. 在起诉程序中适用非法证据排除规则。检察机关应当尽可能使进入审判程序的证据具有证据能力。2. 建立附条件不起诉制度。建立此项制度有其理念、政策和现实根据。立法应当合理规定附条件不起诉的案件范围、考察期限。实行附条件不起诉应当与当事人和解、犯罪嫌疑人社会调查制度相结合，并建立有效的监督机制。3. 创建量刑建议制度。以与规范法院量刑程序相配套，有助于实现量刑公正和有效辩护，提高诉讼效率和公诉能力及水平。