忻元龙绑架案:死刑案件的证据认定——高检指导性案例的个案研究  

Case of Kidnapping Committed by XIN Yuanlong: Identification of Evidence in Death Penalty Case

作　　者：陈兴良[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《法学评论》2014年第5期98-106,共9页Law Review

摘　　要：忻元龙绑架案是最高人民检察院颁布的一个指导性案例,该案例涉及死刑案件的证据认定问题。本文在忻元龙绑架案的官方文本的基础上,对死刑案件的证明标准和证据判断问题进行了研究。我国刑事诉讼法规定的证明标准是"证据确实、充分",同时又把"排除合理怀疑"作为考察内容之一。以上两者是总的证明标准和具体的证明规则之间的关系,在司法实践中是否排除合理怀疑是确定证据是否确实、充分的重要指数。死刑案件的证明标准是否应当高于普通案件,对此在法律上并无规定,而在理论上则存在争议。从死刑的严厉性以及死刑错判难纠的性质考虑,还是应当对死刑案件提出更为严格的证明标准。对于在司法实践中较为普遍的留有余地的死缓判决,只有在定罪证据确实、充分,但判处死刑的量刑证据不能排除合理怀疑的情况下,才具有正当性。如果定罪证据没有达到确实、充分的程度,则不应当判处留有余地的死缓。否则,就会造成死刑的冤假错案。忻元龙绑架案虽然存在个别疑点,但这些疑点是可以排除的,二审法院据此适用留有余地的死缓判决并不妥当。但是,在司法实践中更应当避免的是定罪证据没有达到确实、充分情况下留有余地的死缓判决。The Kidnapping Case of Xin Yuanlong is a guiding case issued by Supreme People＇ s Procuratorate, which is concerned with the proof of evidence in death case. Based on the official text of the Kidnapping Case of Xin Yuanlong, this article studies the issue of standard of proof and assessment of evidence in death case. According to Criminal Procedure Law of China, the standard of proof is ＂the evidence must be certain and sufficient＂, together with the consideration of ＂beyond reasonable doubt＂. The relationship between these two principles is general standard of proof and special rule of proof. In judicial practice, the decision on whether the evidence is beyond reasonable doubt is an important reference for the decision on whether evidence is certain and sufficient. There is no implicit legal rule on whether in death case a higher standard of proof should be adopted and therefore it is quite controversial in theory. Considering the severity of death penalty and the difficult reversal of wrongful death judg- ment, a stricter standard of proof should be adopted in death case. For those death judgment with two-years suspen- sion leaving adequate leeway which appeared in judicial practice very often, it can only be justified when the evi- dence of conviction is certain and sufficient while the evidence of sentencing death penalty is not beyond reasonable doubt. If the evidence of conviction has not reached the standard of certain and sufficient, the judges should not render a death judgment with two-years suspension leaving adequate leeway. If not so, wrongful death convictions will appear. Although there are some doubts in the Kidnapping Case of Xin Yuanlong, the doubts can be excluded. Therefore, the death judgment with two-years suspension leaving adequate leeway rendered by the second instance trial court is not appropriate. However, in judicial practice, the death judgment with two-years suspension leaving adequate leeway in which the evidence of conviction has not reached the standard of certain and s

关 键 词：指导性案例 死刑案件证明标准 留有余地的死缓判决 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]