认罪认罚被告人反悔权研究——以一审宣判后反悔权的正当性和运行机制为分析视角  

On the Defendant's Right of Retraction in Cases Applied Lenient Punishments for the Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Penalty——From the Perspective of the Legitimacy and Operating Mechanism after the First Trial

作　　者：孙海燕 Sun Haiyan(School of Law, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093,China)

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院 [2]江苏省镇江市中级人民法院审判委员会 [3]江苏省镇江市中级人民法院刑一庭

出　　处：《江苏大学学报（社会科学版）》2021年第6期101-112,共12页Journal of Jiangsu University(Social Science Edition)

摘　　要：认罪认罚程序运行是单方听取意见而非双方协商程序,具结书亦非控辩双方签订的“契约”。被告人在一审宣判后应当享有反悔权,反悔权在性质上属于请求权。为防范权利滥用,被告人在一审宣判后的反悔必须有正当理由,应当建立被告人反悔时间与举证责任倒置的逆向梯次关联机制。为保障权利运行,实行检察权的“二元”有限抗诉机制和“反悔不从严”的裁判分级审查机制,区分“应当型”抗诉与“可以型”抗诉,并根据反悔事由确立裁判权的分级审查,对于仅上诉的案件不得取消量刑优惠,抗诉案件至多取消量刑优惠而不能将反悔行为作为“从严”的依据。The guilty plea procedure is a unilateral hearing procedure rather than negotiation.The defendant should be empowered the Right of retraction after the verdict of first instance.In order to guarantee the operation of the right,the defendant should have a legitimate reason to exercise the right after the first Trial,and the reverse echelon correlation should be established between the time of retraction and the reverse onus.The dual limited protest mechanism and grading review mechanism of adjudication should be established.Distinguish“due”protest and“possible”protest,the penalty preference only can be cancelled in the case of protest,and can't be used as a strict basis.

关 键 词：认罪认罚 反悔权 救济权 二元有限抗诉 裁判分级审查 刑事诉讼法 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]