期刊文献+

醉驾型危险驾驶罪刑事证据规则研究——基于刑事一体化的尝试性构建 被引量:17

Rules of Criminal Evidence in Drunk Driving as a Type of Dangerous Driving Crime
原文传递
导出
摘要 醉驾型危险驾驶罪类似国外违警罪的特性,决定了该罪出罪通道不应通过《刑法》第13条中但书现象建立。结合该罪实体要件取决于程序鉴定结果之特性,应跳出刑事实体法之外,结合刑事程序法对刑事证据证明标准有关理论,围绕如何判断醉驾案证据证明力问题并建立相应的证据规则,以严把入罪关。根据醉驾案证据证明力高低不同,可建立如下证据规则:单独呼气酒精测试结果只能作为醉驾案立案侦查依据而非定案证据使用;单独血液酒精含量测试结果可以作为定罪证据使用,且并不违反刑事诉讼法中孤证不立原则,但其客观性与合法性必须经过排除合理怀疑;既无呼气酒精测试也无血液酒精含量测试结果时,仅凭旁证不能认定醉驾犯罪成立。 Because of the similarity between the drunk driving as a type of dangerous driving crime and the police of- fense abroad, we can not judge the non-criminalization of drunk driving through the saving clause in Article 13 of the Criminal Law. We should use the criminal proof standard theory in criminal procedural law, seek the methods of judging the probative force, and construct the evidence rules to achieve the non - criminalization. Firstly, the sole resuh of breath alco- hol test can only be used as the basis of investigation not conviction. Secondly, the sole result of blood alcohol test can be used as the evidence of conviction, but the objectivity and the legality must beyond the reasonable doubt. Thirdly, we can-not convict one person drunk driving crime only by the circumstantial evidence, when there is neither result of breath alco-hol test nor the result of blood alcohol test. The function of human rights protection in criminal law can be fulfilled through constructing the proof rules in drunk driving case.
作者 刘艳红
机构地区 东南大学法学院
出处 《法律科学(西北政法大学学报)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第2期144-153,共10页 Science of Law:Journal of Northwest University of Political Science and Law
基金 国家社会科学基金重大项目(11&ZD160)暨"东大-东南司法鉴定联合研究中心"委托研究项目(SFJD201205)"醉驾犯罪的证据问题与鉴定技术规范化研究"
关键词 醉驾案 证据规则 呼气\血液酒精测试 证明标准 无罪推定 Drunk Driving Cases proof rules Breath/Blood Alcohol Test standard of proof presumption of inno-cence
  • 相关文献

参考文献27

  • 1刘艳红.刑法学研究现状之评价与反思[J].法学研究,2013,35(1):35-40. 被引量:5
  • 2刘海东,曾凯.县域醉驾重点要查二轮摩托[N].检察日报,2013-03-26(4).
  • 3Mordechai Halpert, Boaz Sangero, From A Plane Crash To The Conviction Of An Innocent Person:Why Forensic Science Evi- dence Should Be Inadmissible Unless It Has Been Developed As A Safety- Critical System, 32 Hamline Law Review(2009).
  • 4李娜.酒驾案移送检察后强制措施迥异[N].法制日报,2012-05-02(5).
  • 5游春亮,程海龙.深圳办理醉驾案件半年面临多重法律难题[N].法制日报,2011-12-06(4).
  • 6宋英辉.刑事诉讼学研究述评[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,2009.
  • 7[美]乔恩·R·华尔兹 何家弘译.刑事证据大全[M].北京:中国人民公安大学出版社,1993,10..
  • 8龙宗智.中国法语境中的“排除合理怀疑”[J].中外法学,2012,24(6):1124-1144. 被引量:155
  • 9刘婷,胡振艺,等.醉驾案审判面临7个“模糊地带[N].新法制报,2012-05-23(2).
  • 10Christopher W. Nicholson, Marylands Drunk Driving Laws : An Overview, 11 Baltimore Law Review(1982).

二级参考文献155

共引文献496

同被引文献193

二级引证文献102

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