对检察机关量刑建议制度之反思与重构

量刑建议权本质上属于公诉权的重要组成部分,而公诉权本质上是一种司法请求权,这种请求权不仅包括"求罪权",同时也应包括"求刑权"。由此可见,检察机关不仅有定罪建议权,同时也有量刑建议权。虽然各地检察机关进行了量刑建议制度方面的探索,但在司法实践中还存在种种弊端。应基于当前量刑建议权实施的现状对量刑建议制度进行重构,以期对具体的司法操作有所裨益。     

量刑程序主体初探

量刑程序诉讼行为的目的决定其主体除控辩审三方外，还应包含社会方。各主体在量刑程序中发挥不同的职能作用。为保证主体职能作用的充分发挥，应正确理解相关主体之间的关系，加强相应制度建设。保证量刑程序主体的主体性权利。     

被害人参与量刑程序：现状、困境与展望

被害人参与量刑程序是量刑程序改革的重要组成部分,对于化解社会矛盾、促进社会和谐具有重要意义。从当前试行效果看,这一制度设计在实践中遇到一些困境。2012年修改后的刑事诉讼法为被害人参与量刑程序、发表量刑意见预留了足够空间。未来应区分＂被害人影响陈述＂与被害人的量刑意见,处理好被害人的量刑意见与检察机关的量刑建议的关系,进一步完善具体的制度设计。     

“BACK-END SENTENCING” AND REIMPRISONMENT: INDIVIDUAL,ORGANIZATIONAL, AND COMMUNITY PREDICTORS OF PAROLE SANCTIONING DECISIONS*

An understudied contributor to the massive growth of American incarceration is an increase in the practice of reimprisoning parolees through parole board revocations—now referred to as “back-end sentencing.” To conduct the analyses outlined in this article, we use data from the California Parole Study to analyze the effects of three clusters of factors (parolees' characteristics, organizational pressures, and community conditions) on these sentences. Our analyses are informed by theories that have been used to explain “front-end” (court) sentences, which center on the focal concerns of social-control agents, labeling, and racial threat. Our results indicate that status characteristics—race/ethnicity and gender—affect the likelihood that criminal parole violators are reimprisoned. Moreover, certain “pivotal categories” of parolees—registered sex offenders and those who have committed “serious” or “violent” offenses—are much more likely to be returned to prison than others. Organizational pressure (prison crowding) also affects the likelihood of reimprisonment. Communities' political punitiveness affects the likelihood that technical violators are reimprisoned and that serious or violent offenders are reimprisoned for criminal violations. In this article, we use these findings to consider ways that mass incarceration is driven by both top-down policies as well as bottom-up organizational and community forces.     

CUMULATIVE DISADVANTAGE: EXAMINING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITY IN PROSECUTION AND SENTENCING

Current research on criminal case processing typically examines a single decision‐making point, so drawing reliable conclusions about the impact that factors such as defendants’ race or ethnicity exert across successive stages of the justice system is difficult. Using data from the New York County District Attorney's Office that tracks 185,275 diverse criminal cases, this study assesses racial and ethnic disparity for multiple discretionary points of prosecution and sentencing. Findings from multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the effects of race and ethnicity vary by discretionary point and offense category. Black and Latino defendants were more likely than White defendants to be detained, to receive a custodial plea offer, and to be incarcerated—and they received especially punitive outcomes for person offenses—but were more likely to benefit from case dismissals. The findings for Asian defendants were less consistent but suggest they were the least likely to be detained, to receive custodial offers, and to be incarcerated. These findings are discussed in the context of contemporary theoretical perspectives on racial bias and cumulative disadvantage in the justice system.     

Contextualizing sentencing disparities: using conjunctive analysis of case configurations to identify patterns of variability

Using national data from felony cases processed in state courts (n = 48,006), the current study investigates the nature and magnitude of contextual variability associated with sentencing outcomes. Multivariate models are first estimated to identify the main effects of various offender and offense variables on sentencing decisions. Conjunctive analysis is then used to evaluate the contextual variability of each of these main effects across all observed combinations of offender and offense attributes. Separate analyses are also conducted among states with and without mandatory sentencing guidelines to explore whether these guidelines reduce this variability across different contexts. Findings from this study and its comparative methods are discussed in terms of implications for future research on criminal sentencing and assessing the contextual variability of the main effects of particular legal and extralegal factors.     

“蝇虎齐打”态势下的司法反腐

我国的反腐败模式已由“权力反腐”转入“法治反腐”,在“蝇虎齐打”态势下,司法反腐在腐败治理模：戈中究竟应居何种地位,发挥什么作用？解读公权与腐败两者关系,分析立法权、司法权及行政权在反腐败进程中各自的利害与作用,并以受贿罪的量刑规范化为视点,将进一步明确司法反腐在国家反腐败整体战略中的地位与作用。     

量刑情节本质研究——从《人民法院量刑指导意见(试行)》切入

"规范裁量权,将量刑纳入法庭审理程序"是中央确定的重要司法改革项目.也是当前刑事审判改革的热点问题之一。《人民法院量刑指导意见(试行)》中缺少对量刑情节本质的界定乃一大缺憾,量刑情节在司法实践中的适用也极其混乱。鉴于此,应从量刑情节词义的考究、基本要素的组成、内在结构的构造等角度来探究量刑情节的本质内涵,以期对量刑规范化改革的实施有所裨益。     

量刑建议工作机制研究

量刑建议作为我国刑事诉讼领域的一项改革措施,日益受到司法机关及社会公众的关注。文章对量刑建议的价值、提出原则以及具体制度操作等方面进行了分析论证,以求进一步促进我国量刑建议制度的完善。     

我国社区矫正制度的构建

目前,我国社区矫正的总体发展水平较低,表现为相关立法不够完善,社区矫正刑罚的适用率偏低,执行机制不健全等。文章对管制、缓刑、假释、监外执行、社区服务刑罪犯提出了适用社区矫正的方法,并提出社区矫正量刑改革的具体方案。