刑事案件速裁程序局限性及其完善

在公正基础上制度化地解决有限的司法供给与膨胀的刑事法律需求之间的矛盾是现阶段刑事司法改革的必然要求,基于此,我国在《刑事诉讼法》简易程序的基础上对刑事案件速裁程序进行试点,但是试点中的一些问题阻碍了试点的预期效果的实现。本文分别从侦查机关、公诉机关、被告人、辩护人、审判机关角度分析阻碍速裁程序适用的原因,提出设立非法律因素上诉甄别程序,从而节约二审司法资源、确立司法权威;同时提出构建多层次的刑事司法程序,以改变现行刑事诉讼程序体系扁平的现状。     

HOW JUDGES THINK ABOUT RACIAL DISPARITIES: SITUATIONAL DECISION‐MAKING IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM*

Researchers have theorized how judges’ decision‐making may result in the disproportionate presence of Blacks and Latinos in the criminal justice system. Yet, we have little evidence about how judges make sense of these disparities and what, if anything, they do to address them. By drawing on 59 interviews with state judges in a Northeastern state, we describe, and trace the implications of, judges’ understandings of racial disparities at arraignment, plea hearings, jury selection, and sentencing. Most judges in our sample attribute disparities, in part, to differential treatment by themselves and/or other criminal justice officials, whereas some judges attribute disparities only to the disparate impact of poverty and differences in offending rates. To address disparities, judges report employing two categories of strategies: noninterventionist and interventionist. Noninterventionist strategies concern only a judge's own differential treatment, whereas interventionist strategies concern other actors’ possible differential treatment, as well as the disparate impact of poverty and facially neutral laws. We reveal how the use of noninterventionist strategies by most judges unintentionally reproduces disparities. Through our examination of judges’ understandings of racial disparities throughout the court process, we enhance understandings of American racial inequality and theorize a situational approach to decision‐making in organizational contexts.     

What Executioners Can—and Cannot—Teach Us About the Death Penalty

Those who work with the condemned often come to reject the death penalty not only in individual cases, and not only on the ground that it is poorly implemented. They tend to conclude that the punishment is wrong. I argue that the perspective of the executioner helps illuminate the debate about whether to abolish capital punishment, and that indeed the perspective of those who work with the condemned raises the troubling possibility that support for the death penalty can survive only at a great remove. Jeffrie Murphy has also argued that the executioner’s perspective can be useful, but I contend that Murphy asks the wrong question. His essay considers whether an executioner may, under some circumstances, take pride in his work. The better question is whether anyone ought to be asked to do such work. On this latter question, the perspective of the executioner sheds important light. Like Murphy, I draw on works by and about Albert Pierrepoint, the “last hangman” of Britain. I also draw on the perspectives of numerous executioners, wardens, chaplains, and other death row personnel. I argue that their perspectives offer a powerful argument against the main rationale for the death penalty: retribution. If retribution is keyed to the offender’s character as well as his wrongful act, then post-conviction character ought to matter. The executioners’ accounts share a common theme: that death row inmates change over time and hold the potential for redemption.     

Evaluating the Role of Race in Sentencing: An Entropy Weighting Analysis

The current study builds on prior research examining racial disparities in sentencing. Entropy weighting is introduced as a new method for estimating racial disparities that has several advantages over traditionally used methods. Entropy weighting is compared to regression and propensity score methods in estimating Black-White disparities in incarceration sentences. Although all methods find non-significant racial disparities in incarceration sentences, regression and propensity score methods underestimate disparities in incarceration sentence lengths. Entropy weighting provides comparable estimates to propensity score methods, but assures that the samples are identical on all covariates aside from race. The method offers researchers a useful and flexible approach for estimating racial disparities in criminal justice, and its use may lead to alternative conclusions about the size and presence of racial disparities in sentencing.     

JUDICIAL ROTATION AS CENTRIPETAL FORCE: SENTENCING IN THE COURT COMMUNITIES OF SOUTH CAROLINA*

Courts as communities theory emphasizes the sentencing differences that can arise between localities within a single state. The results of published studies have highlighted how local differences emerge based on informal sociological and political processes defined by the communities perspective. The findings from recent quantitative studies from South Carolina have revealed notably less county variation in sentencing than has been observed elsewhere. I use qualitative interviews with 13 South Carolina trial judges to investigate sentencing processes and to shed light on these findings. The interviews explore the state's legal structure and culture, including the practice of circuit rotation in which judges travel among counties holding court. The results suggest rotation serves as a centripetal force of sentencing culture, homogenizing what might otherwise be a more varied collection of county‐specific norms. Rotation leads to increased uniformity through judge shopping and the cross‐pollination of ideas and norms. Defendants can strategically judge shop and plead in front of a lenient judge—a process that gives rise to the term “plea judge,” which is a label for the most lenient judges who sentence a large number of defendants. Rotation also increases the interactions among judges and prosecutors, expanding networks and grapevines, and leading to cross‐pollination and the sharing of ideas.     

The Unintended consequences of sentencing reforms: Using social chain theory to examine racial disparities in Female imprisonment

The current study uses social chain theory to examine the potential unintended effects of sentencing reforms on racial disparities in female imprisonment. Our analysis measures changes in the relative odds of Black to White female imprisonment using the Relative Rate Index (RRI) through panel regression modeling on 40 states from 1983 to 2008. Our final models indicate that four types of sentencing reforms had unintended perverse effects on racial disparities in prison admissions while Truth in Sentencing laws increased racial disparities in time-served. Eighteen combinations of sentencing reforms also significantly impacted disparities. Theoretical and policy implications are also discussed.     

美国量刑辩护对我国量刑改革的启示

量刑辩护是刑事诉讼制度的设计不可或缺的一项内容,是律师辩护制度的必备内容,是保障被告人权益的途径之一,因此,从保障被告方辩护权的视角设置辩护制度的外围制度是现代对抗制理念下刑事诉讼制度设计的题中之意,而美国关于刑事辩护制度的设计与实践的经验将是我国刑事诉讼中量刑程序改革的有益借鉴。     

我国量刑程序改革中的证据制度完善

在现代刑事司法中,定罪公正和量刑公正一起,构成了司法公正的丰富内涵.而目前,我国量刑不公的问题却日益凸显,随着我国法制建设的发展,学界与实务界也开始关注和研究量刑问题.但人们往往是从实体法的角度研究量刑,其实,量刑公正不仅是实体问题,更是一个程序问题.量刑程序的相对独立化是实现量刑公正的程序路径,但量刑程序的科学设置不...     

Potential Impact of Research on Adolescent Development on Juvenile Judge Decision‐making

This paper discusses how biological and psychological literature on the developmental differences between juveniles and adults may affect juvenile judges in their “dual role” as retributive and rehabilitative decision‐makers in juvenile cases, specifically focusing on sentencing. Particularly, it discusses potential influences of this research on adolescent development regarding four factors known to be integral in juvenile judge decision‐making: legal factors, characteristics of juvenile offenders, and individual structural and social contexts in which judges’ decisions are made. To conclude, implications and recommendations stemming from this discussion are considered.     

Disproportionate minority contact in juvenile justice: today’s,and yesterdays,problems

Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) has been a perplexing problem for the juvenile justice system, and recognized as a national priority since the 1980s. The over-representation of minority youthful offenders throughout juvenile court processing, from arrests to dispositions, has not changed even though significant federal and state efforts have been employed. This paper reviews these racial and ethnic disparity problems, and investigates the history of the juvenile justice system and courts, from the eighteenth century to today’s reformation movement, identifying that DMC is not a recent phenomenon. The history of slavery and the Jim Crow Era greatly impacted the establishment of the juvenile courts and child-centered justice efforts, finding disparities at all historical markers where records are available. When reviewing DMC as we know it today through this context, an argument can be made that limited progress has been made over the past 200 years.