Research On The Criminal Quick Judging Procedure

China has experienced a rapid development in the 21st century, we confront the critical period of adjusting of structure in society and economy. Crime has grown to become an all time high by the time. The case-handling organ has come under great stress. Only increasing judicial resources is far from enough to deal with the issue and is unrealistic. The solution to this problem is to reform the criminal procedure to dissolve the social contradiction fast and increase people’s trust in the judicial system in the premise of judicial justice. So it is urgent to re-examine and re-design criminal procedure system for national building in the context. In this context, the immediate judgment procedure which seeks to solve the criminal disputes in a quick and convenient way emerges. In the proceedings, the criminal quick judging procedure creates a new type to resolve criminal disputes procedure in the form. It can help improve the efficiency of criminal action and save the resources of action. It also can ensure the judicial justice and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the parties. The paper discusses the criminal quick judging procedure from six parts.The first chapter mainly elaborates the necessity of establishing the criminal quick judging procedure. With the increasing of criminal rate and the restriction of the limited judicial resources, our current summary procedure legislation, the simplification mechanism is inadequate and not fully developed. So we need to building a Chinese-style criminal quick judging procedure in light of China’s national conditions.The second chapter analyze the intrinsic value of the criminal quick judging procedure. Under the premise of the maintenance of proceeding fair, improving the effectiveness of the proceedings, achieving balance between them, is the value of the establishment of our quick judging procedure.In the third chapter, through pointing the similarities and differences between quick judging procedure and summary procedure, mainly analysis the differences with the summary procedure and explain the reasons for the program settings. Quick judging procedure greatly improved the efficiency of the proceedings in the scope of the charges, the public prosecutor to appear in court, the trial procedure, the trial organization and the trial period of change, overcoming the shortcomings of low application rate and lack of flexibility.From the perspective of foreign law comparison in the fourth chapter, comparing of the common (mainly list the punishment procedure and the plea bargaining system) and differences between the foreign summary procedure and the quick judging procedure in our country, making good use of it in the design of our country’s quick judging procedure through drawing lessons from successful experience of criminal proceedings abroad.The fifth part is the case analysis of the pilot program. The advantages of the quick judging procedure compared with the simple procedure is the lowing appeal rate, the high court sentencing rate, the high application rate, the high application rate of the suggestion of procuratorial organ, showing great progress. But at the same time, it is worth to think deeply about the problems and deficiencies in the practice, mainly containing that scope of application is relatively narrow, application rate is not expected to reach a predetermined, cumbersome procedures lead to the judicial pressure is not reduced, custody rate, sentencing norms are not detailed enough. The author makes a detailed analysis of the causes of the problem.The sixth part is on the perfection of the running of the criminal procedure in judicial practice. Making four suggestions that try a case by record, change two judge final to one judge final, strengthen consultation coordination between public security and clear lenient punishment and specific sentencing.In the conclusion part, the author emphasizes again the criminal procedure justice and efficiency are two basic value goals, it laid the ground for the development of criminal procedure of our country after constructing diversification of the procedure, in line with the international mainstream diversion mechanism.