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:田毅平[1]
出 处:《西南政法大学学报》2016年第2期73-80,共8页Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law
摘 要:2012年《刑事诉讼法》赋予了技术侦查证据资格,规定了当庭审查和庭外核实两种审查模式,为其运用的规范化和法治化变革创造了难得契机。同时,也存在"庭外核实"过度适用,侵犯辩方人权,难以排除非法证据等弊端。在我国大力推进审判为中心的司法改革背景下,技术侦查证据在刑事审判中的运用必须规范化,亟待建立"庭外核实"的"最后使用原则",充分保障辩方质证权和知情权,发挥专家辅助人的作用,完善非法证据排除规则。The code of criminal procedure in 2012 makes evidence collected by technical investigation admissible,and provides the verification of the type of evidence in the court and out of the court. The articles in the code of criminal procedure offers a golden opportunity for the normalization and legalization of the use of evidence collected by technical investigation. In the mean time,there are some problems such as the abuse of verification out of the court,the invasion of the defense human rights and the difficult of the exclusion of the illegal evidence. In the context of judicial reform which is based on the criminal trial central principle in our country,the use to evidence of technical investigation in a criminal trial must be standardized. The solution lies in the principle of last used of the verification out of the court,the adequate guarantee of the confrontation right and the right to know of the defense,the coming into play of expert assistant and the perfection of the exclusionary rule of illegally obtained evidence.
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:216.73.216.15