法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 拘捕被告強制導尿之檢討(A Reflection on the Forced Urinary Catheterization of Arrested Defendants)
編著譯者: 張麗卿
出版日期: 2022.04
刊登出處: 台灣/月旦醫事法報告第 66 期 /42-52 頁
頁  數: 7 點閱次數: 638
下載點數: 28 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 張麗卿
關 鍵 詞: 身體檢查拘捕取證侵入性導尿
中文摘要: 實務上,驗尿是判斷犯罪嫌疑人或被告有無施用毒品的常見方法,其中最有爭議的是,司法警察依刑事訴訟法第 205 條之 2,執行拘捕取證時,能否將拘捕的犯罪嫌疑人或被告,送至醫院強制插管導尿,藉此採取尿液檢驗。強制插管導尿,是具有侵入性的身體檢查。在德國,具有侵入性的身體檢查,必須對犯罪嫌疑人或被告有初步懷疑,在符合令狀原則、法官保留原則,以及考量是否會造成犯罪嫌疑人或被告的身體健康侵害,才能依法發動。本文借鑑德國法,檢討我國現行制度,並提出些許建議。
英文關鍵詞: physical examinationobtain evidence from an arrested personinvasiveurinary catheterization
英文摘要: In practice, a urinalysis is a common method for judging if a suspect or an accused has used drugs. The most controversial issue is, according to Article 205-2 of Code of Criminal Procedure, whether a judicial policeman is allowed to send a suspect or an accused to hospitals at the time of they are arrested and force them to be catheterized for a urine examination. A forced urinary catheterization is a kind of invasive physical examination. In Germany, an intrusive physical examination can only be legally applied to a suspect or an accused when there is initial suspicion of them, in accordance with the rule of warrant requirement and with consideration of whether it will cause harm to their physical health. This article refers to German laws to reflect on our own current legal system as well as giving some suggestions.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、拘捕取證強制導尿的合法性疑慮
參、德國關於侵入性身體檢查的採證程序
 一、侵入性身體檢查的發動門檻
 二、考量是否造成身體健康侵害
肆、我國拘捕取證強制採尿的檢討
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
      返回功能列