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:张阿妹 ZHANG Amei(Penalty Execution Department,Fujian Police College,Fuzhou,Fujian 350007)
机构地区:[1]福建警察学院刑罚执行系,福建福州350007
出 处:《武夷学院学报》2020年第2期37-42,共6页Journal of Wuyi University
基 金:福建警察学院青年课题(QN1601)。
摘 要:我国刑事裁判文书存在罪数形态的说理不足、书写模板化等问题,罪数理论在刑事裁判文书中的充分说理是文书厘清功能和全面评价原则的要求。考察台湾地区刑事裁判文书罪数说理情况,罪数理论说理与司法实务是互相支撑、共同发展的。在刑事裁判文书中,涉及罪数形态时应把不同罪名体现在刑事裁判文书中,把定罪量刑的过程体现在刑事裁判文书中,为推进刑事裁判文书的改革与个案公平正义的实现提供理论与实践基础。There are some problems in the form of crime number in the criminal judgment documents of our country,such as insufficient reasoning and model writing.Investigation of the number of criminal judgment documents in Taiwan,the theory of crime number and judicial practice support each other and develop together.In the criminal judgment documents,different charges should be reflected in the criminal judgment documents when the crime number forms are involved,and the process of conviction and sentencing should be reflected in the criminal judgment documents,so as to provide theoretical and practical basis for promoting the reform of criminal judgment documents and the realization of fairness and justice in individual cases.
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:216.73.216.49