认罪认罚对审前羁押影响的实证研究——基于盗窃与故意伤害案件裁判文书的比较

Empirical study on the influence of pleading guilty and accepting punishment on pretrial detention——Based on the comparison of judgment documents of theft and intentional injury cases

分析认罪认罚从宽正式运行后某基层法院作出的5104份盗窃罪判决与1350份故意伤害罪判决发现,认罪认罚案件整体羁押率低于非认罪认罚案件,但不同罪名羁押率降幅存在差异;认罪认罚逮捕转取保候审的案件比例高于非认罪认罚案件,但强制措施转化的总体适用率不高。抽样分析结果表明,认罪认罚案件拘留羁押期限较非认罪认罚案件变化不明显,部分认罪认罚案件的拘留时长甚至超过非认罪认罚案件;认罪认罚案件的逮捕羁押时长明显低于非认罪认罚案件。剖析其成因,主要缘于认罪认罚仅作为羁押必要性考量的“末位”因素、拘留功能与定位发生“异化”以及审前羁押时长高度依附于办案期限。为完善认罪认罚下审前羁押适用,应确立“双阶层”的逮捕必要性判断标准,恢复拘留的紧急到案功能,构建认罪案件“非羁押化”的制度体系。

With an analysis of 5,104 larceny judgments and 1,350 intentional injury judgments made by a basic court after the leniency of pleading guilty and accepting punishment was officially launched,it was found that the overall detention rate of pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases was lower than that of non-pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases,but there was a decrease in the rate of detention for different crimes.The proportion of the arrest for cases of pleading guilty and accepting punishment transferred to bail pending trial is higher than that of non-pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases,but the overall application rate of the transformation of compulsory measures is not high.The results of sampling analysis show that the duration of detention in pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases is not significantly different from that in non-pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases,and the detention time of some pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases is even longer than that of non-pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases.Analyzing its causes,it is mainly due to the fact that pleading guilty and accepting punishment is only the“last”factor for the necessity of detention,the“alienation”of the function and positioning of detention and the length of pretrial detention is highly dependent on the time limit for handling cases.In order to improve the application of pretrial detention for pleading guilty and accepting punishment,the“two-class”criteria for judging the necessity of arrest should be established,the emergency function of detention should be restored,and a“non-custodial”system should be established for pleading guilty and accepting punishment cases.