检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]华东政法大学,上海200042 [2]上海市黄浦区人民检察院,上海200003
出 处:《中国司法鉴定》2008年第5期31-35,共5页Chinese Journal of Forensic Sciences
摘 要:目前我国司法鉴定和鉴定结论质证存在着大量的问题,导致公诉人在鉴定结论质证中处于相对优势地位。但是质证是保障鉴定结论可靠性的重要手段,要求完善质证机制,刑事诉讼法的发展趋势也必将对鉴定结论质证进行实质性的改革。在这种情况下,公诉人"轻松质证"的优势地位将面临挑战,如何应对全新的质证模式,已经是公诉人不得不重视的问题。At present, there are a large number of problems in China's judicial expertise and the cross-examination of appraisal conclusions, which gives rise to a relatively advantageous position for the prosecutor in the cross-examination of appraisal conclusions. Since the cross-examination is the device to assure reliability of appraisal conclusions, it is essential to perfect the mechanism of the cross-examination of appraisal conclusions. And the Code of Criminal Procedure tends to reform the cross-examination of appraisal conclusions substantively. Under such circumstances, with the prosecutors' dominant position called "easily cross-examine" challenged, prosecutors have to attach much importance to the new mode of cross-examination.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.117