论量刑事实的证明标准  

The Standard of Proof Concerning Sentencing Facts

作　　者：张吉喜[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院

出　　处：《证据科学》2013年第5期545-553,共9页Evidence Science

基　　金：2011年度教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目"量刑程序中的证据和证明问题研究"(11YJA820108)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：《刑事诉讼法》、《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法〉的解释》和《关于办理死刑案件审查判断证据若干问题的规定》对量刑事实的证明标准的规定与学术观点之间存在一定分歧。为了防止立法技术上的因素使被告人陷于不利境地以及在界定定罪事实与量刑事实上的无休止争论,罪重事实应当适用与定罪事实相同的证明标准。量刑事实的举证责任分配以及控辩双方的举证能力差异决定着罪轻事实的证明标准应当低于定罪事实的证明标准。其中,从轻处罚的事实可以适用优势证据标准;减轻处罚的事实和免除处罚的事实应当适用明晰可信标准。There are certain differences between Criminal Procedure Law, the Interpretation on the Application of Criminal Procedure Law by the Supreme People＇s Court, the Provisions of a Number of Issues on the Examination and Judgment of Evidence in Death Penalty Cases and academic points of view on standard of proof concerning sentencing facts. In order to prevent a defendant from falling into a vulnerable position due to the factors of legislative technique and the endless debates on defining the facts for conviction and sentencing, the same standard as to be used to prove the facts for conviction should be applied to prove the facts to the defendant＇s disadvantage. Differences in the distribution of burden of proof of sentencing facts and in the ability of prosecution and defense to produce evidence decide the standard to prove facts to the defendant＇s advantage is lower than that for conviction. Standard of preponderance of evidence shall be applied to facts for lighter punishment while the clear and convincing evidence shall be applied to facts for cases involving mitigation and exemption of punishment.

关 键 词：量刑事实 罪重事实 罪轻事实 证明标准 量刑程序 

分 类 号：D915.13[政治法律—诉讼法学]