Research On Supplement Collect Evidence Of Second Instance In Criminal Procedure

In this paper, in addition to the introduction, the text is divided into five parts.The first part contains the introduction to define additional evidence gathered and practical needs of the second instance. In the Two-tier Trial System, in the second instance of the program to supplement the evidence collected, in order to find out the facts and improve the efficiency of second instance proceedings, is a manifestation of our temper justice with mercy criminal policy needs. In judicial practice, the main body supplement the collection of evidence, including courts, prosecutors, the defendants and their defenders, due to the lack of specific legal norms, conduct supplementary evidence collected almost no restrictions.The second part contains analyze the dispute the current status of gather additional evidence of the court in the second instance, and on this basis, have a certain amount of reflection. At present, China court of second instance exist problems mainly reflected in: Pretrial complement the collection of evidence to influence the judge's neutrality, the specific implementation of the main diversification complement the collection of behavioral, and part of the evidence collected by the court is not in court to present supplementary. Scholars dispute is focused on whether the evidence pre-trial judge's behavior will affect the impartial judgment, and other aspects of how to make a choice between the supplement and collection of evidence remand. The reason is mainly due to the second trial judge is not clear positioning function.The third part includes the introduce of collection of the current status of gather additional evidence of the procuratorate, the existence of major controversy at present, and rethink it profoundly. Supplemented collect evidence by the prosecution in the second trial phase, reflecting the the investigating authorities with additional collection efficiency is low, there is a clear tendency to collect on the supplemental content, and note as evidence that the frequencies higher and so on. Two prominent controversy is: First, the prosecution have the right to decide supplement collection evidence. The second is whether make a limit of the prosecution not submit evidence of intentional behavior restrictions. The reason for this status, not only include the defined of procuratorate functions in the second instance is not clear, but also because of the imperfections in the law.The fourth part is the analysis of the status of defendants and their counsels to gatheradditional evidence. Defendants and their defenders have a small relatively complement the collection of evidence in the second instance, there are no apparent dispute, the main problem is the presence of "false meritorious" phenomenon, partly instigated defender witnesses change their testimony, and did not hire a defender case control debate inequality more apparent. To improve and solve the problem, we not only need to enhance the participation of defense counsel, but also need the joint efforts of court and the prosecution in the second instance.The fifth part is the image of perfecting our second criminal trial proceedings additional evidence collection system. Based on the above four sections discussed, the second trial for the Improvement of supplementary evidence collection system needs to go through a gradual process. First, it should clear that court play a major role and procuratorate play a secondary role in the second instance proceedings gather additional evidence. Secondly, after China's "Code of Criminal Procedure," the level of principled provisions regulate specific behaviors requires a combination of judicial practice gradually Legislation. Finally, we have to take measures to deal with the problems :current operation is not standardized, low collection efficiency complement, and take advantage of the existing conditions as much as possible to improve the effectiveness of supplementary evidence collection.