On The Proof Of Sentencing Facts

Conviction and sentencing are two basic activities of criminal justice in our country,the basic objective of criminal justice is to achieve the accuracy of the conviction and therationality of sentencing. The traditional criminal legislation, theory and judicial practice inour country do not discriminate between them, no matter for trial procedure or evidencerules, mostly it starts from and around conviction issues. With the reform of sentencingstandardization, sentencing process separates from conviction programs gradually intheory and legislation, and establishes a relatively independent sentencing process in thejudicial interpretation. But as the core evidence rules of litigation, it still shows the mixedtendency. Sentencing evidence rule is a bridge to connect sentencing substantive law andprocedural law, with the background of the reform of the sentencing process makingprogress, clearly know the difference between conviction and sentencing, establishingrules of sentencing evidence is the inevitable topic of independent sentencing procedure.For the theoretical level, to promote the deepening of sentencing process reformation andexpand the vision of evidence law and the criminal system of; Practical level, it is on theuse of the sentencing fact judgment and criminal proof system; for the practical level, it isthe premise of reviewing, judging and using sentencing facts, only to determine the rangeof sentencing facts and investigation judgment standard can judges’ discretionary powerbe restrained, to solve the problem of sentencing imbalance, to realize the justice ofsentencing.In this paper, except the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into threeparts, there are more than29000words in total.The first part is about sorting out sentencing facts. The author made a simpleintroduction of foreign sentencing facts, then analyzed the legislation and research statusof sentencing facts in China on the basis of summarizing foreign countries’ experience,focusing on the concept and the demarcation of sentencing facts scope. The author alsoclassified sentencing facts from multiple angles to ensure sentencing information iscomprehensive and provides the basis for the proof responsibility distribution ofsentencing facts and the determination of proof standard at the same time.The second part is about the proof responsibility distribution of sentencing facts. Fromthe comparative perspective, the author investigated foreign countries’ legislation andresearch status of sentencing facts, analyzed the effect that different sentencingprocedure and litigation pattern has on the proof responsibility of sentencing facts. Tookour countries’ current legislation status and the characteristics of sentencing procedure as a starting point, the author determined the proof responsibility distribution of sentencingfacts according to different litigation subjects’ position in the sentencing procedure, andemphasized playing the role of the judge in the sentencing survey at the same time.The third part is about the sentencing facts’ proving standard. Firstly the authorinvestigated the sentencing facts’ proving standard abroad, combining with the presentlegislation status in our country, setting different sentencing facts and proving subjects asthe standard, to build a hierarchical sentencing facts’ proving standard in our country.