法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 2016 年刑事程序法回顧:沒收程序法、羈押閱卷與證據法則(Review the Criminal Procedural Law in 2016: Procedural Law of Confiscation, the Right of Accessing to the Case Files in Detention Procedure and Evidential Rules)
編著譯者: 薛智仁
出版日期: 2017.11
刊登出處: 台灣/國立臺灣大學法學論叢第 46 卷 特刊/1493-1529 頁
頁  數: 37 點閱次數: 2711
下載點數: 148 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 國立臺灣大學法律學院
關 鍵 詞: 沒收程序法扣押單獨沒收參與沒收程序羈押閱卷傳聞法則非任意性自白之延續效力拒絕證言權
中文摘要: 隨著政黨輪替,2016 年開始興起各種司法改革議題的討論風潮,但是刑事程序法的真正進展,主要表現在三方面:一是增訂沒收程序法,擴大保全沒收與追徵之扣押,賦予第三人沒收程序參與權。在 2015 年改革沒收實體法,擴大國家沒收權限之後,此一增訂是保全沒收裁判之實現、保障被沒收人財產權的程序配套。二是司法院釋字第 737 號解釋,承認被告及其辯護人在偵查中羈押程序享有卷證資訊獲知權,並促成 2017 年的羈押閱卷權改革,使強制辯護延伸適用於羈押審查程序。三是刑事證據法,最高法院就非任意性自白之延續效力判準、傳聞證據之證據能力與使用限制、以及業務拒絕證言權之效力範圍等問題,提出新穎的觀點,可看出實務在先天不良的證據法框架下對於保障對質詰問權的努力,是值得繼續觀察的實務發展。整體上,刑事程序法在 2016 年有長足的進步。
英文關鍵詞: procedural law of confiscationattachmentconfiscate independentlyparticipate in confiscate procedurethe right of accessing to the case files in detention procedurehearsay rulescontinuous effect of non-arbitrary confessionright to refuse testimony
英文摘要: Due to the party alternation, there are a lot of discussions about judicial reforms in 2016. But the improvements of criminal procedural law demonstrated mostly in three aspects. First of all, the addition of confiscatory procedural law broadens the confiscation of preserves and the attachment of levy, and empowers third-party the participatory right in confiscate procedure. Secondly, the J.Y. interpretation 737 proclaimed that defenders and lawyers have the right of accessing to case files in investigative detention procedure, and promoted the amendment in 2017. Thirdly, the evidential rules. Supreme Court brought out the standards of continuous effect of non-arbitrary confession, the competence and operating restrictions of hearsay evidences and so on, which are worth observing the following practical improvements. To summarize, the criminal procedural law has made great strides in 2016.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、立法變動:沒收程序法改革
一、 保全沒收追徵之扣押
二、單獨沒收程序
三、參與沒收程序
參、大法官解釋:偵查中羈押審查程序之卷證資訊獲知權
一、解釋意旨及其影響
二、本文評釋
肆、最高法院判決:證據法則之發展
一、非任意性自白之延續效力
二、行政檢查之鑑定報告證據能力
三、未經被告詰問之證詞使用限制
四、藥師之拒絕證言權範圍
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列