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
作 者:卢迪[1]
机构地区:[1]中国政法大学,北京100088
出 处:《湖北函授大学学报》2016年第1期73-75,共3页
摘 要:二审发回重审制度功能异化,降低了诉讼效益,浪费了司法资源,与程序正当和诉讼人权的理念相违背。对此,学者提出了解决问题的不同观点,立法也已予以回应。但学者的观点单独来看都没有充分的说服力,其给出的制度设计仍显得片面与模糊;法律修改幅度不大,同实务中暴露的问题未形成一一对应关系。划分层次,区分情形地对二审发回重审制度进行重构,仍显得十分必要。The function alienation of retrial system of the second trial back to criminal reduces the lawsuit efficiency,wastes the judicial resources,and runs counter to the concept of litigation rights. To this,scholars put forward different views to solve the problem,legislation has also responded. But the scholars view individually are not fully convincing and the system design is one- sided and vague; amendment is modest,with the exposed problems in the practice of being a one- to- one relationship. It is necessary to reconstruct the division level and the distinguished situation to the criminal retrial system,
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:216.73.216.222