认罪认罚案件中被告人上诉权研究  

Research on Appeal Rights of the Accused Who Pleaded Guilty and Accepted Punishment Proposal

作　　者：易文杰 YI Wen-jie(Law School,Shanghai University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 201701)

机构地区：[1]上海政法学院法律学院,上海201701

出　　处：《广州广播电视大学学报》2020年第2期98-106,112,共10页Journal of Guangzhou Open University

基　　金：2019年度上海政法学院规划经费项目“‘捕诉一体’背景下检察机关审前主导的理论困境与突破”(项目编号:2019GS0103)。

摘　　要：针对被告人认罪认罚后提出上诉这一问题,全面取消或全面保留被告人上诉权的观点均不合理。从比较法上看,部分域外国家和地区对诉辩协商制度下被告人的上诉权进行了一定限制,只是限制的内容和方式各异。我国可对认罪认罚案件中被告人的上诉权进行一定限制,但应仅限于速裁案件。在限制方式上可实行有因上诉制度,由法官对上诉理由进行审查核实。同时,为全方位控制认罪认罚案件的上诉率,应施加司法人员履行加重告知义务、实行相对确定的量刑建议以及"见证阶段"的同步录音录像制度等相关配套措施。It is unreasonable to cancel or retain the appeal rights of the accused who pleaded guilty and accepted punishment proposal completely. From the perspective of comparative law, some foreign countries and regions have limited the defendant’s rights of appeal under the system of consultation between the plaintiff and the defendant, but the contents and ways of restriction are different. In our country, the rights of appeal of the defendant in the case of pleading guilty can be limited, but it should be limited to the case of quick adjudication. In the way of restriction, the system of appeal with cause can be implemented, and the reasons for appeal shall be examined and verified by the judge. At the same time, in order to control the appeal rate of guilty plea and punishment cases in an all-round way, the relevant supporting measures should be taken, such as the judicial personnel performing the obligation of aggravating notification, implementing the relatively determined sentencing suggestions and the synchronous recording and video system in the "witness stage".

关 键 词：认罪认罚 上诉权 诉辩协商 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]