Discussion On The Sentencing Norms Of Drunken Dangerous Driving Crime

The 8th Amendment of The Criminal Law sins the drunk driving of motor vehicles by establishing one of the 133 rd articles of the Criminal Law.Since then,the legal consequences of drunk driving behavior have been upgraded from administrative punishment to criminal punishment,which has played a deterrent effect on the increasingly rampant drunk drivers.However,its normative purpose is not fully realized.From the beginning of the legislation when only the law itself exist,to today when both judicial interpretation and scholar theories are flourishing,Drunken dangerous driving crime has gradually become a hot topic in criminal law.Though this sin is a misdemeanor,it is closely related to our daily life.We may not be alcoholic,but it is rather often when we were talked into drinking by friends.In addition,China's long-standing wine culture has led to the frequent occurrence of drunken dangerous driving cases.The effective response to the increase in drunken dangerous driving cases is a test of the judicial ability of balanced sentencing.After all,legal punishment is not an end but a means.We only use criminal punishment to prevent crime.To achieve this vision,the balance of penalties and the application of norms are crucial.This paper will focus on the current sentencing situation of the drunken dangerous driving crime,sorts out the judicial documents and trial data of such crimes,Analyze some unreasonable aspects of judicial practice and the causes and effects of derivative legal issues,and propose countermeasures for the adjustment of judicial applicable rules,in order to benefit the accurate and unified judicial and the normative purpose of achieving dangerous driving crimes.In addition to the introduction,the text is mainly divided into three parts,the abstract is as follows:The first part mainly expounds the legislative overview of the drunken dangerous driving crime sentencing,summarizes the sentencing laws and judicial application rules,and outlined the current judicial sentencing situation according to the statistical analysis of the drunk-type dangerous driving crime cases of Shanghai Huangpu District People's Court in 2011-2018.The Sentencing anomie performance is carried out in six aspects: regional differences,detention,fines,convictions,probation,special occupations,etc,and puts forward the "differentiation of the implementation rules of local courts" and "the criminal concentration factor of the criminal investigation","the amount of fines lags behind","difficult driving sin of dangerous driving crimes","the basis for the application of probation is vague" and "special occupational misdemeanor and serious fruit" and other issues.The second part of this paper mainly discusses the macroscopic reasons and influences of the sentencing anomie of drunken dangerous driving crimes.Firstly,from the perspective of legal system,the inherent lag and incompatibility of legal norms,and the limitations of judicial convictions and light sentences have led to the anomie of sentencing.Secondly,from the perspective of judicial application,the lack of norms of discretionary exercise and the inappropriate influence of public opinion have led to the anomie of sentencing.Thirdly,from the perspective of legal-interest conflicts,sentencing anomie will affect the priority of legal protection during legal-interest conflicts.Fourthly,from the perspective of recidivism prevention,sentencing anomie will weaken the general prevention and special prevention,and hinder the realization of the purpose of penalty.The third part of this paper mainly studies the adjustment of judicial application rules for drunken dangerous driving crimes.According to the status quo of judicial sentencing as summarized in the previous article,through in-depth analysis of its causes,the author puts forward a bold idea of adjusting the rules and countermeasures for the application of sentencing.In terms of judicial application rules,in addition to fines,all local authorities should unify judicial application rules.In terms of criminal detention,the basis of blood alcohol concentration,motor vehicle type,drunk driving location,and drunk driving mileage should be taken as the basis for the determination of the penalty point.In terms of fines,taking into account the differences between urban and rural residents,the amount of fines should be adjusted substantially based on per capita disposable income.In terms of decriminalization,the rule of “conviction as principle,decriminalization as supplement” should be adhered,and decriminalization by counter-evidence and special reasons should be permitted.In terms of probation application,the circumstance restriction of non-probation and severely probation should be perfected in principle,so as to strictly limit the application of probation.In terms of special occupation sentencing,prohibited period of employment should be set,and the time should be determined according to the seriousness of the crime rather than the subjective aspect of the crime.