量刑幅度变更后追诉时效溯及力问题研究  

On Retrospect of Limitation of Prosecution after the Change of Sentencing Range

作　　者：王桢[1] 

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院

出　　处：《江苏警官学院学报》2015年第2期42-47,共6页Journal of Jiangsu Police Institute

基　　金：司法部2007年度国家法治与法学理论研究重点项目"中国犯罪的基本态势与防治对策";项目编号:07SFB1005

摘　　要：我国量刑幅度变更后对追诉时效的溯及力问题未有恰当解释。时效溯及既往源于自身实体法、程序法的双重属性,同时一定程度地依附于量刑的溯及力。溯及既往的前提是时效仍在进行不能终结,因此时效溯及既往与其停止计算的时间点息息相关。以公诉为终期的时效因对超期羁押的限制作用,对时效目实现的推动作用,对立法协调的印证作用应当受到立法的青睐。我国应当对时效制度的立法进行改造,将公诉规定为时效的终期,以确定时效在具体案件中是否还在进行;并对溯及力明文加以规定,适用最为有利于行为人的时效期限。The retrospect of limitation of prosecution has not been given appropriate explanation since Chinese sentencing amplitude was changed. Retrospect of limitation of prosecution itself is originated from the double attributes of substantive law and procedural law, meanwhile, to a certain extent, attached to the retrospect of sentencing. Only when limitation is not expired can retrospect be in effect, so retrospect is closely related to the timing of stopping calculation. Owing to the restriction of limitation on extended detention, its supporting function of legislative coordination should be in the favor of legislation. The paper holds that the time of prosecuting the case ought to be the end of effectiveness, on which to determine whether the limitation in the specific case is still going on. In addition, retrospect, which is in the favor of offenders, should be regulated clearly in the law.

关 键 词：追诉时效 时效终期 量刑幅度 刑法 

分 类 号：D924.13[政治法律—刑法学]