规范化量刑方法之反思与重构

Reflection and Reconstruction of Standardized Method of Sentencing

"幅的理论"提供的标准过于模糊,并没有走出传统经验量刑法的窠臼,尤其是将预防刑量的裁定与责任刑量的确定纠缠在一起,两者界限不明。"点的理论"未能解决没有预防刑情节时的宣告刑确定问题,不考量正义与否,也没有限制预防刑的比重,不仅没能解决量刑中的二律背反问题,反而又回到了问题的原点——报应与预防在刑罚目的中的地位。发端于国内量刑基准理论、规定在《关于常见犯罪的量刑指导意见》中的量刑方法抛弃了责任主义刑罚思想,导致利用从严预防情节调节基准刑可能会突破责任的度,被告人可能因此而承担额外的刑罚。对此进行改造的路径是:先计算出责任刑的量,再利用"先宽后严法"调节基准刑,然后对拟定的宣告刑进行检验,如果超出责任限度,则直接将责任刑确定为宣告刑。

The standard provided by“the theory of amplitude”is too vague and does not go beyond the traditional experience of criminal law.In particular,the ruling on the prevention of punishment is entangled with the determination of the amount of responsibility.The boundaries between the two are unknown.The“point theory”failed to solve the problem of determining the sentence without the prevention of the criminal sentiment.It did not consider justice,nor did it limit the proportion of the penalty.It failed to solve the problem of dichotomy in sentencing,but returned to the starting point of the problem,i.e.the status of retribution and prevention in the purpose of punishment.The sentencing method,which originated from the domestic sentencing benchmark theory and stipulated in The Guidance of Sentencing of Common Crimes,abandons the idea of responsible criminal punishment,which leads to the use of strict prevention of the plot to adjust the benchmark penalty and the defendant may therefore bear additional penalties.The path to reform is first to calculate the amount of the liability penalty,adjust the benchmark penalty,and then test the proposed declaration.If the liability limit is exceeded,the liability penalty is directly determined as the punishment.