期刊文献+

从个别到全面:完善非法证据排除规则的本土道路 被引量:3

Perfection of the Illegal Evidence Exclusion Rules in Native Conditions——From the Specific to the Comprehensive
原文传递
导出
摘要 2012年刑事诉讼法基本确立了非法证据排除规则,这是从国家法律层面认可程序独立价值的一个重要体现,不仅是对过往司法经验与实践的总结,更加体现了诉讼观念的转变。即使在美国,非法证据排除规则的外延也在随着社会情势的变化而不断变化,近年来出现了保守趋向。中国与美国的法律文化、历史背景的差异显著,在引进该项制度时就更需斟酌。最主要的,基于震慑警察非法行为而确立的美国非法证据排除规则制度逻辑基本可以概括为"从全面排除到个别例外",而基于国情,中国相应规则的设立应该会走一条"从个别例外到相对全面排除"的路径。 In the year of 2012, "Illegal Evidence Exclusion Rules" was established in Criminal Procedure Law, which supposed to be a crucial embodiment of the independent value of process approved at the level of national laws. Not only considered as a summary of previous judicial experience and practice, it also reflects the shifting attitudes in litigation idea. Even in the U. S, the extension of the exclusionary rules which tended to be more conservative in recent years is still following the social conditions. In view of the significant differences between China and the U. S in the field of legal culture and historical backgrounds, being more prudent commence to be necessary on the introduction of said exclusionary rule. This article shows that the logic of the illegal evidence exclusionary rule, which was established to deter illegal police behavior, can be generally summarized as "from total exclusion to individual exception" . However, the establishment of the corre- sponding rules in China should take a path of "from few exceptions to relatively comprehensive exclusion" based on our national conditions.
作者 郭烁
出处 《中国社会科学院研究生院学报》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第3期87-92,共6页 Journal of Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
关键词 非法证据 震慑理论 排除规则 程序正义 illegal evidence deterrence theory exclusionary rule procedural justice
  • 相关文献

参考文献20

  • 1Wolf v. Colorado 338 U. S. 25 [1949] .
  • 2Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U. S. 643 [1961] .
  • 3王茂松.《非法取得证据有关法律问题之研究》,(台湾)金玉出版社1987年版,第22页.
  • 4Weeks v. United States, 232 U. S. 383 [1914] .
  • 5Gouled v. United States, 255 U. S. 298, 313 [1921] .
  • 6United States v. Leon, 468 U. S. 897 [1984] .
  • 7Elkins v. United States, 364 U. S. 206 [1960] .
  • 8United States v. Calandra, 414 U. S. 338 [1974] .
  • 9Michigan v. Tucker, 417 U. ,% 433 [1974] .
  • 10Adams v. New York, 192 U. S. 585 [1904].

二级参考文献47

  • 1联邦宪法法院判决第34册,P.238(1973).
  • 2联邦宪法法院判决第80册,P.373—383(1989).
  • 3Roxin.Strafverfahrensrecht,《刑事诉讼法》(德)C.H.Beck,第25版(1998),p.290—292.
  • 4Brain v. United States,168 U.S.532 (1897).
  • 5Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1 (1964).
  • 6Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. ( 1966 ).
  • 7联邦最高法院刑事判决第22册,P.170.
  • 8联邦最高法院刑事判决第25册P.325.
  • 9联邦最高法院刑事判决第31册,P.395.
  • 10联邦最高法院刑事判决第38册,P.214.

共引文献130

同被引文献25

二级引证文献9

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