On The Independence Of The Sentencing Procedure

The sentencing process in our country as a criminal trial one of the links in parallel with the conviction, in the conviction of the accused, the prosecution and the defense to participate fully in, the judge ultimately make the procedure to be followed by the sentencing judgment. View of the basic requirements of procedural justice, and only within the atmosphere of open, fair and impartial, the judge a litigant can effectively participate in the sentencing judgment made on the basis of the sentencing process in order to convince people, should the conviction procedures to ensure fair sentencing the program is biased to the parties can not personally participate in the process of sentencing conclusions, can not understand the judge’s sentencing decision, the reasons and basis for, will inevitably have sentencing conclusions are fair and reasonable doubts.The text of this paper is divided into five parts, as follows:The first description of the sentencing process for the legislative and judicial Present Situation. This chapter is divided into two parts, first part introduces the legislation of the sentencing process the status quo, China does not exist in the legal sense of the sentencing process, a description of the legislative status quo of the sentencing process is built around the absence of legislation and some legal documents mentioned in sporadic slightest commence; the second part of the role and functions of the parties in the various stages of the sentencing process is described from the perspective of the judicial status quo.The second chapter is the justification of the independent sentencing process. This chapter is divided into four parts, the first to build a separate sentencing procedures to ensure that sentencing an open, fair and transparent is very necessary and urgent to clarify from the perspective of procedural justice; the second part of an independent sentencing procedures to help ensure clear from the perspective of the protection of human rights the accused and the rights of victims; the third from the penalty and fair requirements to clarify the separate sentencing procedures for the effective participation of all parties to create conditions for the sentencing results obtained on this basis more readily accepted by the parties; the fourth part from the trial neutrality requirements of the inevitable requirement to protect the prosecution and the defense of equality against the trial is also neutral in the sentencing process.The third is our conviction and sentencing the mixed discretion of the judicial drawbacks. This chapter is divided into three parts, the first part of the hybrid discretionary mode caused by the abuse of the discretion of the judge; the second part of the mixed-mode is difficult to protect the prosecution and the defense sentencing right to participate; the third part of mixed-mode led to the sentencing reasoning, sentencing Conclusion The lack of public recognition aspects.The forth Chapter is about Comparative Study of the extra-territorial independence. This chapter is divided into five parts, the first part illustrates the mixed mode of sentencing separation mode of the common law and civil law, and the Two pros and cons of sentencing patterns were compared; The second part describes the two legal systems on the distinction between conviction of the rules of evidence and sentencing rules of evidence, mainly from the burden of proof sharing and proof of the standard aspects; the third section describes the sentencing recommendations of the two legal systems and our prosecutors to prove the Prosecutor theoretical and practical significance of the sentencing recommendations; the fourth part is to compare the differences of the two legal systems in the sentencing reasoning; fifth part is a difference in the extent of the impact of sentencing on the victims of the Two of the victims of the common law can fully participate in sentencing and civil law on the participation of victims sentencing to give some attention but is still inadequate.The fifth Chapter is about sentencing independent of concrete ideas. Divided into five parts:First, to distinguish between guilty plea and pleaded not guilty to the two cases to design the sentencing process; The impact of the criminal reconciliation on sentencing independence in order not to undermine the value of the sentencing of independence in sentencing balanced application to respond to criminal reconciliation restrictions; Third, the impact of plea bargaining independent sentencing procedures; China’s sentencing investigation report on the sentencing investigation report system, compared to the U.S. sentencing investigation report system shows shortcomings and the problems; five is on the prosecutor’s sentencing recommendations, the first describes the current difficulties faced by the sentencing recommendation system, and finally for the implementation of the sentencing recommendation own views of the points.