逮捕条件中曾经故意犯罪的细化考量  

Detailed Considerations on Intentional Crime in the Arrest Conditions

作　　者：岳启杰 Yue Qijie

机构地区：[1]北京市门头沟区人民检察院

出　　处：《北京政法职业学院学报》2021年第4期60-65,共6页Journal of Beijing College of Politics and Law

基　　金：“北京市人民检察院2021年检察理论课题”的阶段性研究成果,项目编号:BJ2021B32,课题负责人、执笔人岳启杰。

摘　　要：我国刑事诉讼法第81条第3款规定,有证据证明有犯罪事实,可能判处徒刑以上刑罚,曾经故意犯罪或者身份不明的,应当予以逮捕。在符合证据条件和刑罚条件时,只要曾经故意犯罪,直接批准逮捕,没有裁量余地。在成文法的语境下,曾经故意犯罪立法规定在司法实践中引起了一些困惑,如果简单机械司法,对于曾经故意犯罪“一刀切”,不加以区分,不仅会引起逮捕率上升,而且难以保障个案的公平正义。为此,应具体问题具体分析,细化曾经犯罪的情形,全面准确评价行为人的社会危险性。最高司法机关可以通过出台司法解释,弥补立法不足,并完善相关配套措施,以满足司法办案多样性的司法需求,为司法实践提供法律支持。China's Criminal Procedure Law article 81 clause 3 provides that there is evidence to prove the facts of a crime,the criminal suspect or defendant may be sentenced to imprisonment or a heavier punishment;the criminal suspect or defendant who once committed an intentional crime or has not been identified shall be arrested.When elements of evidence and prerequisites of punishment are conformed,there is no discretion to direct approval of arrest so long as the person has once committed an intentional crime.In the context of statutory law,the legislative provisions of intentional crimes have caused confusion in judicial practice.If the judiciary is applied simply and mechanically to those who once committed intentional crimes without distinction,it will not only increase the arrest rate,but also add to difficulty to guarantee the fairness and justice in individual cases.Therefore,we should make a concrete analysis of the concrete problem,concretize the situation of having committed a crime,and evaluate the social danger of the actor comprehensively and accurately.To provide legal support for judicial practice,the supreme judicial organs are expected to issue judicial interpretations and improve relevant supporting measures to make up deficiency of legislation to meet the judicial needs of the diversed judicial cases handling.

关 键 词：逮捕 曾经故意 司法解释 细化完善 

分 类 号：D902[政治法律—法学理论]