期刊文献+

公民“接受陪审团审判权”的宪政意义 被引量:1

On the Right to a Jury Trial and Its Constitutional Value:Taking the Seventh Amendment of US Constitution as the Center
下载PDF
导出
摘要 在美国,"接受陪审团审判权"是当事人享有的一项诉讼权利,也是公民享有的一项宪法权利。这种权利在宪法、普通法、制定法和衡平法上都有其法律依据。"接受陪审团审判权"之所以入宪,就是因为它具有对抗强权以维护公民自由,发挥制衡法官以保障政治民主,维护司法独立和提升司法权威等功能和价值。目前,我国建立陪审团审判制度既有必要性,也有可行性。 In U.S.A,Tried by a jury is a fundamental lawsuit right and constitutional right enjoyed by parties and citizen.This right rooted in American constitution,statutes,common law and Equity."Tried by a jury" entering the constitution is because that it had the function and value of resisting the power to maintain the freedom of citizen,balancing the judiciary to achieving political democracy,ensuring judicial dependence and promoting judiciary authority.At present,it is not only necessary,but feasible to build the jury system.
作者 王德新
出处 《福建行政学院学报》 2011年第4期75-80,96,共7页 Journal of Fujian Administration Institute
关键词 接受陪审团审判权 适用范围 宪政价值 借鉴意义 Constitution Jury trial Scope of application Constitutional value
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献3

共引文献78

同被引文献15

  • 1何家弘.司法证明方式和证据规则的历史沿革——对西方证据法的再认识[J].环球法律评论,1999,21(4):32-51. 被引量:55
  • 2廖永安,李旭.对我国陪审制的否定性评价[J].金陵法律评论,2003(2):43-50. 被引量:8
  • 3William Burnham. Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States[M]. St. Paul:West Publishing Co. , 1995.
  • 4Alan Scheflin, Jon Van Dyke. Jury Nullification.. The Con- tours of a Controversy[J]. Lawand Contemporary Problems, 1980,(43).
  • 5Charles Francis Adams. The Life and Works of John Adams: Cited from Alan Scheflin, Jury Nullification: The Right to Say No[J]. Southern California Law Review, 1972, (45).
  • 6Mark DeWolfe Howe. Juries as Judges of Criminal Law[J]. Harvard Law Review, 1939 , (52).
  • 7Renee Lettow Lerner. The Transformation of the American Civil Trial:The Silent Judge[J]. William and Mary Law Re- view, 2000, (t).
  • 8Peter Duff,Mark Findlay. Jury Reform: of Myths and Moral Panics[J]. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 1997,(25).
  • 9W. R. Cornish. The Jury[M]. London: Allen Lane the Penguin Press, 1968.
  • 10State of Georgia v. Brailsford, 3 U. S. (3 Dall. ) 1, 4 (1794).

引证文献1

二级引证文献2

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