法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱： 2017 年刑事程序法回顧：刑事救濟程序、證據法則與強制處分（Review the Development of Criminal Procedure Law in 2017: Criminal Relief Procedure, Evidential Rules, Coercive Measure）
編著譯者： 薛智仁
出版日期： 2018.11
刊登出處： 台灣／國立臺灣大學法學論叢／第 47 卷 特刊／1881-1929 頁
頁　　數： 49 點閱次數： 1306
下載點數： 196 點 銷售明細： 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者： 薛智仁
關 鍵 詞： 上訴利益；具體上訴理由；強制辯護；訴訟權；自白減刑規定；特赦；再審；利誘訊問；搜索扣押；通訊監察
中文摘要： 2017 年總統府召開司改國是會議，後續法律改革預期將重大影響刑事程序法的全貌，其發展有待未來觀察，本文僅聚焦在評論刑事程序法的實務發展，特別是最高法院的重要決議和裁判。整體來說，刑事救濟程序是 2017 年實務發展成果最豐富的領域。司法院釋字第 752 號解釋基於訴訟權之保障，宣告刑事訴訟法第 376 條禁止二審初受有罪判決之人上訴第三審違憲，促成修法。最高法院承認被告對宣告監護處分之無罪判決得提起上訴、受特赦之人得聲請再審，值得肯定；在強制辯護案件否定第二審法院指定辯護人協助被告上訴的義務，以及課予再審聲請人對於新事證確實性過高的舉證責任及說明義務，則是有待檢討。除此之外，面對法律未明訂的新型科技偵查手段，最高法院秉持強制偵查法定原則及隱私權保障的精神，宣告 GPS 跟監違法，對調取網路傳真適用相對法官保留原則，令人喝采！
英文關鍵詞： appeal interest；concrete grounds of appeal；compulsory defense；right of legal proceedings；rules of confession commutation；amnesty；retrial；advantageous leading；search and seizure；communication surveillance
英文摘要： In 2017, the office of the president convened the meeting of national judicial reform. We can expect and observe that the coming reforms will completely affect the criminal procedure law. This article focuses on commenting on the practical developments of criminal procedure law, especially the important decisions, judgments and verdicts of the Supreme Court. On the whole, criminal relief procedure is the most plentiful field of practical development in 2017. Based on guaranteeing the right of legal proceedings, J. Y. Interpretation No. 752 declared article 376 of the Criminal Procedure Law forbidding defenders only guilty in the second instance to appeal to the third instance was unconstitutional and promoted the amendment. We approve that the Supreme Court admitted defenders can appeal for the judgment declaring not guilty but announcing custody and protection and people amnestied can apply for the retrial. However, it should be criticized that the Supreme Court denied the obligation of assignment of counsel in the second instance to assist defender in appealing in compulsory counsel cases and obligated the application of retrial an excessive burden of proof or obligation to disclose about newly discovered evidence. In addition, we should applaud that when facing the newly technological detective measures not established in the law, the Supreme Court based on the principle of coercive measure according to law and protecting the right to privacy, declared the use of GPS for tracking is unconstitutional, and the obtainment of internet fax also applies to the principle of relative judge reservation.
目　　次： 壹、前言
貳、刑事救濟程序
一、上訴通則
二、第三審上訴
三、再審
參、證據法則
一、利誘訊問之判準及法律效果
二、通譯未經具結之法律效果
肆、強制處分
一、GPS 跟監之適法性
二、調取網路傳真之適法性
伍、結論
相關法條：
相關判解：
相關函釋：
    相關論著：
    返回功能列