法官庭外调查权的合理性质疑

法官庭外调查权是职权主义诉讼模式的一个重要特征 ,我国修改后的刑事诉讼法对此进行了保留。但是 ,由于它混淆了侦查与审判的职能 ,违背了诉审分离的原则 ,破坏了法官的中立形象 ,损害了审判的公正 ,给诉讼理论和司法实践都造成了混乱 ,因此 ,建议取消法官的庭外调查权 ,相应地完善有关的配套措施。     

The Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 2018: Updating the Federal Approach to Youth Involved,and At‐Risk of Becoming Involved,in the Juvenile Justice System

On December 21, 2018, the Juvenile Justice Reform Act was signed into law, marking the first update in 16 years to the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974, as amended. The reforms reflect much of the knowledge that has been gained through research and science over the past decade and strengthen the Act’s core protections for youth in the juvenile justice system. The changes also expand the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention’s role in research, and technical assistance, and provide for additional oversight for related programs.     

The Santa Clara County Greenbook Story: From Theory to Transformation

This article is an overview of the past 20 years, from a judicial perspective, of how a discreet selection of Greenbook recommendations were implemented in Santa Clara County, California. This historical overview shows that it is possible to take a guidebook written by national experts from many jurisdictions and tailor the intervention to a particular location with the assistance of local leadership. We applied a theoretical framework to government agency interventions and to the very real needs of families, and that process resulted in a profound transformation of practice.     

Mental illness in the eyes of the law: examining perceptions of stigma among judges and attorneys

In response to the increasing numbers of mentally ill persons placed under the care of correctional institutions, community-based diversion programs have been established to address the unique needs and challenges of this vulnerable population. Given that legal personnel may serve as gatekeepers in placement decisions, and the lack of existing research examining their attitudes toward offenders with mental illness, the present study aimed to evaluate perceptions of dangerousness and treatment need among a sample of judges, prosecutors, and public defenders across the state of Mississippi. While controlling for age, results of a factorial MANCOVA revealed that public defenders, relative to both judges and prosecutors, endorsed more compassionate attitudes about defendants with mental illnesses. Furthermore, political ideology did not significantly influence attitudes toward mentally ill offenders. While judges and prosecutors endorsed more negative stereotypes about mental illness and perceived mentally ill defendants as a greater risk to the community, mean scores across groups suggested moderately positive attitudes overall. Study limitations, implications for correctional mental health providers, and directions for future research are discussed.     

Improving the quality of drug court clinical screening: a call for performance measurement policy reform

Despite the widespread use of the drug court model, standardized performance measures for drug courts are not uniformly utilized, and rarely include process measures. To ensure that drug courts are being implemented in the most effective manner, the use of performance measurement tools should be considered for wide scale adoption. Drug court effectiveness is moderated by participant characteristics, and is most effective for individuals with the highest substance use needs. Therefore, having quality clinical screening processes is crucial to ensuring that drug courts are serving the population for which they are effective. This paper examines clinical screening in drug courts, to answer the following 1) what is the current state of screening, 2) what works, and 3) why measurement matters. It also proposes a clinical screening performance measure to improve fidelity and ensure appropriate participant enrollment. The creation of a performance measure would create opportunities to improve drug court outcomes, and leverage pay-for-performance models.     

法院与当事人诉讼角色定位之机理探析

民事诉讼是以解决纠纷为目的的活动。在诉讼过程中 ,法院与当事人之间的相互关系即彼此在诉讼中的地位 ,直接决定了一个国家民事诉讼的体制性问题。如何调整法院与当事人在诉讼中的诉讼关系 ,是每一个国家民事诉讼法必须解决并加以规定的基本内容。民事诉讼的辩论原则、处分原则以及诚实信用原则 ,从不同的角度界定了法院与当事人在诉讼中的地位。辩论原则在形成法院裁判的基础方面起着调节作用 ;而处分原则在程序的进行、权利的处置等方面的支配权进行分配 ;诚实信用原则则在均衡并促成法院与当事人协同诉讼方面发挥着作用。     

论我国宪法监督制度的健全和完善

我国现行宪法监督制度存在明显的缺陷,尤其是没有专门的宪法监督机构,违宪审查较为薄弱。当今世界有议会或权力机关监督、普通法院监督和专门机构监督三种宪法监督模式。中国应立足国情,总结和借鉴外国先进的立法模式和经验,设立专门的宪法监督机构,即独立的宪法专门委员会,有效地审查和纠正违宪行为,以完善我国的宪法运行机制,充分发挥作为根本法宪法的作用。     

论我国的法院改革与司法独立

确立司法独立的原则和制度,根本上的原因在于保障司法机关和司法人员严格地实施法律、最大程度地实现司法正义.文章试从司法独立应有的法院整体独立、审级独立和法官个人独立三个含义方面来找出我国法院现行体制中存在的问题,并就此给出相应的司法建议.     

试论我国行政审判体制的改革与完善--以建立独立的行政法院为路径的思考

我国行政诉讼法的实施过程中出现了审判难、执行难、案件受理数量低、撤诉率高的现象.之所以出现如此状况,原因在于我国的行政审判体制存在弊端负责审理行政案件的一些审判组织和审判人员既缺乏必要的独立性,难以对抗来自行政机关的不当干预;又缺乏必要的专业知识和审判经验,难以保证行政案件的审判质量.改革我国行政审判体制的出路在于设立独立的行政法院.目前在我国设立独立的行政法院既有必要性又有可行性.