期刊文献+

刑事诉讼中司法认知的规制 被引量:1

Regulations of Judicial Notice with the Criminal Procedure
原文传递
导出
摘要 诉讼证明是针对案件的"中心事实",而大量的"背景事实"通常无需提出证据予以证明。这可以通过司法认知得以认定。比较美国和德国刑事诉讼的司法认知规则,两者基本相同,但也略有差异。从诉讼制度传统出发,我国应当借鉴德国的体例,将司法认知确定为两类事实,一类是众所周知的事实;另一类是法官因职业关系已知的事实。 The litigation proof is the "center fact" which aims at case, but a great deal of "background facts" usually do not need to put forward a proof. This can be carried out by the judicial notice. Comparative research the United States and Germany of judicial notice rules of criminal procedure, we find that both countries are same alike, but also slightly have difference. With the litigation system tradition, our country shall draw lessons from Germany style. The fact of judicial notice is divided into two types. One type is the well -known fact and the other is the fact which judge has already known because of the occupation.
作者 章礼明 容鹢
出处 《政法学刊》 2009年第6期57-62,共6页 Journal of Political Science and Law
关键词 司法认知 诉讼证明 众所周知 judicial notice litigation proof well -known fact
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

  • 1(德)托马斯·魏根特(ThomasWeigend)著,岳礼玲,温小洁.德国刑事诉讼程序[M]中国政法大学出版社,2004.
  • 2[美]约翰·W.斯特龙(HohnW.Strong)主编,汤维建等.麦考密克论证据[M]中国政法大学出版社,2004.
  • 3(美)乔恩·R.华尔兹(JonR.Walts)著,何家弘等.刑事证据大全[M]中国人民公安大学出版社,2004.

同被引文献7

引证文献1

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部