指定辩护范围扩张之实效性考察——基于试点城市抢劫罪的实证研究

The Effect of the Expansion of Appointed Defense——Empirical Research Based on Robbery Crime in Pilot Cities

随着刑事案件律师辩护全覆盖的推进,指定辩护在刑事诉讼中的覆盖范围显著扩张,对其实效性的考察将同时具有理论检视和政策评估的双重意义。从首批八个试点地区的抢劫罪切入的实证研究发现,大部分地区的指定辩护率在试点之后大幅上升。然而,倾向得分匹配的定量分析揭示,指定辩护律师无论是在审前强制措施的适用,还是在量刑结果上,都没有显著改善被告人的处遇。在部分试点地区,指定辩护律师的辩护效果显著弱于委托辩护的律师。质性访谈的结果揭示,指定辩护律师介入案件的时间过晚、律师的报酬激励不足以及辩护经验和技巧的相对匮乏,都一定程度上阻碍了指定辩护中辩护效果的实现。同时,刑事案件律师辩护全覆盖之后法律援助案件激增,进一步加剧了指定辩护中人力、物力和财力上的紧张程度。上述实证研究发现能够为新时期指定辩护制度的完善提供“循证式”的政策参考。

With the advancement of the full coverage of lawyers in criminal cases, the coverage of appointed defense in criminal cases has expanded significantly. The examination of its effectiveness has both theoretical and practical meanings. While the rate of appointed defense in robbery cases in most areas increased significantly after the pilot, quantitative analysis using propensity score matching reveals that the appointment of defense counsel does little to improve the defendant’s treatment, either in pretrial detentions or in sentencing outcomes. In some pilot areas, the effect of appointed defense lawyers is significantly weaker than that of the entrusted lawyers. The results of the qualitative interview reveal that the delayed intervention of appointed defense lawyers, insufficient incentives for lawyers, and relative lack of defense experience and skills have hindered the realization of the defense effect in appointed defense. At the same time, the caseload of legal services surged after the program was carried out, which further exacerbated the strain on human, material, and financial resources in appointed defense. The above empirical findings can provide “evidence-based” policy implications for the improvement of the appointed defense system in the new era.