民愤与死刑量刑——死刑量刑中对“人民司法为人民”理念的贯彻

在具体的司法实践过程中，如何妥善处理民愤与量刑特别是死刑量刑之间的关系，将直接影响司法实践的社会认同度。科学把握民愤与酌定量刑情节以及法定量刑情节的关系，是刑法理论和司法实践必须解决的问题。     

量刑规范化改革及路径选择

量刑的规范化是解决实践中量刑偏差问题的根本途径,是合理限制刑罚裁量权、实现量刑公正的必然要求。我国司法实践中的"电脑量刑"是一种量刑规范化改革措施,有其科学性。但在目前首要的是确定刑法分则规定的抽象个罪的量刑基准,尽可能地防止量刑畸重畸轻问题。我们应当选择一些常见多发的犯罪规范量刑。实证调查分析方法是寻求量刑基准的最基本方法。确定量刑基准要避免量刑标准绝对化;要建立适当的刑事判例制度为补充;要通过量刑监督限制法官的量刑裁量权。     

A brief overview of quantitative criminology in Australasia: 1981–1995

This paper reviews quantitative criminological research, especially of a sophisticated mathematical nature, published by researchers in Australia and New Zealand since 1981. A statistical analysis of quantitative articles published between 1981 and 1995 in the leading academic journal.The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, showed that using the five topical categories developed by Farrington (this issue), there has been little change in the types of research carried out, with studies of court processes and correctional issues accounting for two-thirds of papers. The numbers of “simple” and ”sophisticated” quantitative articles as proportions of the total published also did not vary over the 15 years. Areas of strength in quantitative research include drugs, alcohol, and crime; indigenous peoples and the criminal justice system; regulatory law enforcement; the modeling of recidivism; and sentencing. Most sophisticated quantitative research is carried out by noncriminologists, and it appears unlikely that the amount of mathematically sophisticated research will increase significantly in the next few years. Experimental studies and longitudinal designs will probably slowly grow in popularity, and crime prevention will emerge as an area of quantitative strength.     

Difference, Disparity, and Race/Ethnic Bias in Federal Sentencing

Federal sentencing guidelines were enacted to reduce unwarranted disparities in sentencing. In this paper we examine the degree to which disparity in sentencing on the basis of race and ethnicity occurred in federal sentencing after the guidelines were implemented. We consider how much of the disparity is explained by offense-related factors as specified in the guidelines. We find that African Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans receive relatively harsher sentences than whites and that these differentials are only partly explained by offense-related characteristics. We interpret our findings in light of attribution, uncertainty avoidance, and conflict theories.     

关于野生动物角制品鉴定与相关法律的研究

动物角制品是野生动物资源中的宝贵财富。当今社会,许多不法分子猖狂走私、贩卖、运输、加工动物角制品牟取暴利,这已引起中国政府和国际社会的高度关注。根据我国法律,量刑标准是参照该动物的保护级别和涉案价值来认定刑律。文章具体阐述了动物角制品鉴定的相关法律问题。     

量刑思维规律下的量刑方法构建

量刑在本质上不是＂刑之量化＂,而是＂刑之裁量＂。这决定了量刑思维不只是形式逻辑思维或辩证逻辑思维,而是二者的有机统一。量刑方法作为量刑思维的表现手段,需遵循量刑思维的以上逻辑规律。传统的经验量刑法虽然是辩证逻辑思维的充分展现,但没有融入现代形式逻辑的现代科技手段;而所谓现代量刑方法虽然使用了现代科技手段,但又只是遵循现代形式逻辑规律,规避了辩证逻辑规律。刑法现代化下的量刑方法构建,应是基于量刑思维的逻辑规律,把传统经验量刑法与各所谓现代量刑方法进行整合,以形成定量与定性相结合的量刑方法。     

论未成年犯刑罚裁量机制

A市B法院两个年度审结的未成年人刑事案件一定程度上反映了未成年犯刑罚裁量中的实践问题，主要是未充分贯彻未成年人刑事司法政策，从宽不足以及量刑失衡等问题。究其主要原因是实体上从严行使的定刑权及规范缺失，以及程序上量刑自由裁量权行使的制度性障碍。为此，有必要完善未成年犯刑罚裁量机制，既要完善刑事实体规范，确立未成年犯量刑之法律依据，也要注重完善未成年犯量刑程序性保障机制，确保量刑公正。     

“三位一体”量刑规范化模式的选择及架构——以对当前量刑规范化模式的反思为视角

电脑量刑、量刑建议、量刑程序、量刑指南等主张,或偏执于量刑程序的规范化,或偏执于量刑实体的规范化,不能实现量刑公正。我们应构建以量刑程序为基础,以量刑指南为指导,以量刑说理为辅助的"三位一体"量刑规范化模式,同时兼顾量刑程序与实体公正,确保量刑公正的有效实现。     

责任主义主导量刑情节适用之提倡——兼与《人民法院量刑指导意见（试行）》比较

作为刑法中保障国民自由的原理,责任主义成为法治国刑法中的一项基本原则.在量刑中贯彻责任主义,采取的是先责任后预防的量刑步骤,相应地,量刑情节区分为责任刑情节和预防刑情节,责任是刑罚的上限.相比较而言,我国《人民法院量刑指导意见（试行）》缺乏明确的原理支撑,对量刑步骤、量刑情节的适用顺序的规定,缺乏逻辑合理性,有必要予以修正.     

危险驾驶罪实现量刑均衡的思考——基于299个案例的实证考察

从湖北法院2011年5月1日至2012年4月30日审结的299起危险驾驶案件来看,危险驾驶罪存在量刑失衡的问题。应从统一入罪门槛标准、体现各种量刑情节、明确缓刑适用标准、规范罚金数额标准以及平等适用免处标准等方面,来实现危险驾驶罪量刑均衡。