《美国联邦量刑指南》评析——兼议对我国量刑指导的借鉴
摘要
量刑或称刑罚裁量,是指法院根据刑法规定,在认定犯罪的基础上,对犯罪行为人是否判处刑罚、判处何种刑罚以及判处多重刑罚的判断与确定。公正是量刑的基本诉求,量刑不公一方面损害司法的尊严,另一方面侵害被告人的合法权益无法实现安抚被害人的目的以及预防犯罪的目的。正是基于此,各国均注重量刑公正的制度设立。
二级参考文献25
-
1[美]约书亚·德雷斯勒、艾伦·C·迈克尔斯著.《美国刑事诉讼法精解》,魏晓娜译,北京大学出版社2009年版,第222-223页.
-
2Paul H. Robinson, One Perspective on Sentencing Reform in the United States, 8 Crim. L. F. 1, 1997, p7.
-
3UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION, FIFTEEN YEARS OF GUIDELINES SENTENCING-An Assessment of How Well the Federal Criminal Justice System is Achieving the Goals of Sentencing Reform, 2004, p13.
-
4United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, § 3E1. 1 (Nov.2009), p483.
-
5The sky is not falling-that which you feel is merely a no. 10 earthquake. Blakely V. Washington: The Supreme Court Sentences the Ameri can Criminal Justice System to Disaster, Bedlam, and Reform[J]. 26 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 719, p4.
-
6Ben Richard, APPROACHING THE NEXT STOP ON THE SUPREME COURT'S SIXTH AMENDMENT JOURNEY TO "APPREN- DI-LAND": THE INVALIDATION OF THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES[J].6 FI. Coastal L. Rev. 193, Fall, 2004, p3. See also, 542 U. S. 296; 124 S. Ct. 2531; 159 L. Ed. 2d 403; 2004 U. S. LEXIS 4573, p13.
-
7The sky is not failing-that which you feel is merely a no. 10 earthquake. Blakely V. Washington: The Supreme Court Sentences the Ameri- can Criminal Justice System to Disaster, Bedlam, and Reform[J]. p4.
-
8THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES WEIGHT--LOSS PLAN= JUST HOW MANDATORY ARE THE "ADVISORY" GUIDELINES AFTER UNITED STATES V. BOOKER? [J].p10.
-
9Ben Richard, APPROACHING THE NEXT STOP ON THE SUPREME COURTS SIXTH AMENDMENT JOURNEY TO "APPREN- DI-- LAND" : THE INVALIDATION OF THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES[J]. 6 F1. Coastal L. Rev. 193, Fall, 2004, p4.
-
10Michael D. Wysocki, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT: THE EFFECTS OF BLAKELY V. WASHINGTON, UNITED STATES V. BOOKER, AND THE FUTURE OF THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES[J].38 Tex. Tech L. Rev. 495, Winter, 2006, p18.
共引文献5
-
1郭念念,樊梦成.司法量刑均衡理论及其实践探索[J].黄河水利职业技术学院学报,2014,26(3):96-98.
-
2郑州市二七区人民检察院课题组.量刑监督与审判独立关系研究[J].河南社会科学,2014,22(10):46-49.
-
3赵恒.论从宽处理的三种模式[J].现代法学,2017,39(5):73-93. 被引量：29
-
4陶朗逍.民营企业刑事合规的解构与展望[J].浙江工商大学学报,2021(1):72-81. 被引量：26
-
5李佳纯.美英量刑模式及其对我国量刑规范化改革的启示[J].信阳师范学院学报（哲学社会科学版）,2024,44(5):34-37.
-
1官文生.量刑规范化改革若干问题思考[J].量刑研究,2015,2(1):34-44.
-
2李现卿.酒驾“碰瓷”案件犯罪行为特点及审查要点[J].天津检察,2019,0(1):26-28.
-
3徐萌萌.生与死的博弈:厘定死刑案件量刑因子适用规则[J].佳木斯职业学院学报,2018,34(10):174-175.
-
4李本森.量刑规范化改革的“三点论”——以美国的量刑改革为参照[J].量刑研究,2014,1(1):3-9. 被引量：2
-
5邢进,张宏生.浅谈犯罪现场心理痕迹的分析[J].神州,2019,0(5):242-242.
-
6王彬.犯罪侦查中的数据挖掘及其作用分析[J].广西警察学院学报,2019,32(2):35-42. 被引量：3
-
7安志远,张埕砜,叶振,刘锦媛,赵东.法医微生物学在应对生物犯罪中的研究及应用进展[J].中国法医学杂志,2019,34(2):173-176. 被引量：2
-
8王喆.美国辩诉交易中的控辩协商——以“审判阴影模型”为视角的思考[J].兰州大学学报（社会科学版）,2019,47(2):43-53. 被引量：5
-
9邱雅娴,聂永刚.大数据背景下非接触性犯罪的成因及治理[J].学术探索,2019(4):76-81. 被引量：3
-
10孙本雄.多次犯立法中行政法与刑法交叉问题研究[J].江西社会科学,2019,39(3):196-204. 被引量：10
