Research On The Standardization Of Judicial Decisions

Criminal referees usually shoulder the unshirkable responsibility.As indispensable,they are also doomed to the destiny of continuous improvement.There are a number of discussions around the standardization of criminal judgments.But whether it is the establishment of a rational dialogue platform in criminal trials or the concern of referee reasoning,the systemic norms of criminal judgment cannot be solved fundamentally.At the same time,through empirical research,we find that the judges of the grass-roots courts do not truly reflect the complete process of the trial in the criminal judgment.On the one hand,the criminal judgment text does not faithfully describe the statements about the facts and laws of the case and the law.On the other hand,there are also the ills that judges have determined that arguments and evidence cannot not meet certain entity standards.The core elements of the standardization of criminal judgments are centered on the criminal judgment text,the substantive standards of criminal judgment,and the criminal judgment.The construction of text based on respecting the statements of both the prosecution and the defense is the basic meaning of the standardization of criminal judgment.On the cornerstone of maintaining the stability of the arguments of the prosecution and the defense,the judge conducts the fact finding and the law application with rational and feasible substantive standards,and carries out reasoning and argumentation.The rules of text construction and entity standards must be followed by the corresponding program design.The consequences of the violation of the text and entity rules are the trigger of the relief procedure.The corrective function of the procedure allows the criminal judge to finally complete the judicial control in the standardization.