题名

美國認罪協商制度之研究及對台灣之啟示

并列篇名

A Study on the Plea-Bargain System in the United States and How Can Taiwan Learn from Its Experiences

作者

金孟華(Mong-Hwa Chin);蘇怡如(Yi-Ju Su)

关键词

司法改革 ; 案件量負荷 ; 認罪協商 ; 檢察官裁量權 ; 審判懲罰 ; Judicial Reform ; Caseload ; Plea-Bargain ; Prosecutorial Discretion ; Trial Penalty

期刊名称

臺北大學法學論叢

卷期/出版年月

122期(2022 / 06 / 01)

页次

205 - 257

内容语文

繁體中文

中文摘要

近年來在司法改革的浪潮下,我國刑事訴訟法歷經多次改革,但卻遲遲未能處理司法系統案件負荷之問題,案件量的超載儼然成為未來刑事訴訟制度繼續改革之阻礙,實有必要加以正視。在美國,案件量的重擔主要是透過認罪協商制度進行舒緩,然而,此制度過度壓抑被告自由決定是否行使受審權之結果,始終為人所詬病。本研究擬針對美國認罪協商制度及其缺點進行介紹,強調認罪協商制度背後存在之系統性影響因素,包括檢察官廣泛的起訴裁量權、過度擴張的刑事法體系與強制最低刑度相結合的審判懲罰、美國審前羈押與保釋制度的適用、協商程序中辯護權的運作問題等,試圖釐清美國認罪協商制度失靈之原因。本文擬先就美國認罪協商制度進行討論,其中包含認罪協商制度的法律框架、美國檢察官的裁量權限及影響認罪協商制度的環境因素,再與我國協商制度相對照,最後試圖整理出若我國考慮放寬現行協商制度,可以嘗試什麼樣的途徑,又將可能面臨哪些問題,期待本文的討論可作為擬定未來刑事政策之參考。

英文摘要

The judicial reforms in recent years have brought many changes to the exiting criminal justice system, but none of the reforms has effectively addressed the overburdened justice system. The United States uses the plea-bargain system to alleviate the problem caused by the growing caseload. However, it is also widely criticized by commentators that the system puts too much pressure on the defendant. This paper seeks to describe the factors that led to the failure of the American system, especially focusing on systematic issues such as the prosecutor’s broad prosecutorial discretion, overextended criminal law system, application of mandatory minimum penalty, the pretrial detention and bail system, and ineffective assistance of counsel in plea-bargain. This article first discusses the plea-bargain system in the United States, including the prosecutorial discretion and the systematic factors that affects the system. The second part compares the United States system with the Taiwan system. Finally, this article would contemplate on the possible problems that needs to be solved when Taiwan loosens the current restrictions on plea-bargain a lean toward the American model. It is expected that the discussion in this article can be used as a reference for future criminal policy reforms.

主题分类 社會科學 > 法律學
参考文献
  1. 王兆鵬(2009)。實質及忠實之辯護-最高法院相關判決評釋。法令月刊,60(7)
    連結:
  2. 王皇玉(2008)。認罪協商程序之法社會學考察:以台灣刑事司法改革為例。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,37(4)
    連結:
  3. 溫祖德(2018)。檢察官選擇性起訴之審查-以美國法制析論我國未來規範之面向。東海大學法學研究,53
    連結:
  4. 盧映潔(2016)。德國刑事訴訟依協商為判決之制度發展與實踐。國立中正大學法學集刊,53
    連結:
  5. Alkon, Cynthia(2016).Plea Bargain Negotiations: Defining Competence Beyond Lafler and Frye.AM. CRIM. L. REV.,53,377-406.
  6. Alkon, Cynthia(2015).An Overlooked Key to Reversing Mass Incarceration: Reforming the Law to Reduce Prosecutorial Power in Plea Bargaining.U. MD. L. J. RACE, RELIGION, GENDER & CLASS,15,191-208.
  7. Appleman, Laura I.(2010).The Plea Jury.IND. L. J.,85,731-776.
  8. Barkow, Rachel E.(2015).Clemency and Presidential Administration of Criminal Law.N.Y.U. L. REV.,90,802-869.
  9. Bibas, Stephanos(2011).Regulating the Plea-Bargaining Market: From Caveat Emptor to Consumer Protection.CALIF. L. REV.,99,1117-1161.
  10. Bibas, Stephanos(2006).Transparency and Participation in Criminal Procedure.N.Y.U. L. REV.,81,911-966.
  11. Billings, Thanithia(2016).Private Interest, Public Sphere: Eliminating the Use of Commercial Bail Bondsmen in the Criminal Justice System.B. C. L. REV.,57,1337-1365.
  12. Chamberlin, John A.(1998).Bounty Hunters: Can the Criminal Justice System Live Without Them?.U. ILL. L. REV.,1998,1175-1205.
  13. Combs, Nancy Amoury(2002).Copping a Plea to Genocide: The Plea Bargaining of International Crimes.U. PA. L. REV.,151,1-157.
  14. Conley, Gregory A.(1982).Guilty Pleas.GEO. L. J.,71,544-560.
  15. Covey, Russell D.(2008).Fixed Justice: Reforming Plea Bargaining with Plea-Based Ceilings.TUL. L. REV.,82,1237-1290.
  16. DRESSLER, JOSHUA,MICHAELS, ALAN C.(2015).UNDERSTANDING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: ADJUDICATION.
  17. GARRETT, BRANDON L.(2011).CONVICTING THE INNOCENT: WHERE CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS GO WRONG.
  18. Griffin, Lisa Kern(2017).State Incentives, Plea Bargaining Regulation, and the Failed Market for Indigent Defense.LAW & CONTEMP. PROBS.,80,83-105.
  19. Guggenheim, Martin(2012).The People’s Right to a Well-Funded Indigent Defender System.N.Y.U. REV. L. & SOC. CHANGE,36,395-464.
  20. Heaton, Paul(2017).The Downstream Consequences of Misdemeanor Pretrial Detention.STAN. L. REV.,69,711-794.
  21. HENNING, PETER J.(2016).CRIMINAL PRETRIAL ADVOCACY.
  22. Heron, Cyril A. L.(2020).How to Sue an Asue? Closing the Racial Wealth Gap Through the Transplantation of a Cultural Institution.MICH. J. RACE & L.,26,171-203.
  23. JUSTICE POLICY INSTITUTE(2012).BAIL FAIL: WHY THE U.S. SHOULD END THE PRACTICE OF USING MONEY FOR BAIL.
  24. Kim, Andrew Chongseh(2015).Underestimating the Trial Penalty: An Empirical Analysis of the Federal Trial Penalty and Critique of the Abrams Study.MISS. L. J.,84,1195-1255.
  25. Luna, Erik,Cassell, Paul G.(2010).Mandatory Minimalism.CARDOZO L. REV.,32,1-83.
  26. Ortman, William(2019).Second-Best Criminal Justice.WASH. U. L. REV.,96,1061-1110.
  27. Price, Mary(2019).Weaponizing Justice: Mandatory Minimums, the Trial Penalty, and the Purposes of Punishment.FED. SENT. R.,31,309-314.
  28. PRYOR, WILLIAM H., JR.(2018).UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION GUIDELINES MANUAL.
  29. Sarch, Alexander,Wodak, Daniel(2018).Resolving Judicial Dilemmas.VA. J. CRIM. L.,6,93-181.
  30. Scott, Robert E.,Stuntz, William J.(1992).Plea Bargaining as Contract.YALE L. J.,101,1909-1968.
  31. Stuntz, William J.(2001).The Pathological Politics of Criminal Law.MICH. L. REV.,100,505-600.
  32. Zunkel, Erica,Siegler, Alison(2020).The Federal Judiciary’s Role in Drug Law Reform in an Era of Congressional Dysfunction.OHIO ST. J. CRIM. L.,18,283-328.
  33. 王兆鵬(2010).刑事訴訟講義.元照出版有限公司.
  34. 王兆鵬(2004)。論刑事訴訟新增訂之協商程序(上)。司法周刊,1181
  35. 王兆鵬(2004)。論刑事訴訟新增訂之協商程序(中)。司法周刊,1182
  36. 朱石炎(2017)。偵查案件之強制辯護。司法周刊,1848
  37. 何賴傑(2009)。偵查程序強制辯護之指定及違法效果-以德國刑事訴訟法為觀察重點(下)。政大法學評論,112
  38. 何賴傑(2009)。偵查程序強制辯護之指定及違法效果-以德國刑事訴訟法為觀察重點(上)。政大法學評論,111
  39. 吳巡龍(2008).刑事訴訟與證據法全集.新學林出版股份有限公司.
  40. 吳巡龍(2002)。美國的量刑公式化。月旦法學雜誌,85
  41. 吳巡龍(2004)。我國協商程序實務問題的探討。月旦法學教室,22
  42. 林鈺雄(2020).刑事訴訟法(下).自版.
  43. 林鈺雄(2020).刑事訴訟法(上).自版.
  44. 林輝煌(1998)。建構犯罪被害人之司法保護體系-美國制度之借鏡。律師雜誌,223
  45. 金孟華(2013)。心理耗盡對於法官決策的影響。司法改革雜誌,95
  46. 洪堯讚(2006)。國立中正大學法律學研究所。
  47. 孫啟強(2007)。協商程序在實務運作之情形(上)。司法周刊,1333
  48. 孫啟強(2008)。我國協商程序之立法特徵及修法建議。軍法專刊,54(4)
  49. 張明偉(2020)。美國聯邦量刑指南適用之研究及其對臺灣的啟示。興大法學,28
  50. 連孟琦(2017)。德國被害人訴訟參加(附加訴訟)之引進。月旦法學雜誌,269
  51. 郭元宏(2005)。國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所。
  52. 陳文貴(2018)。當前刑事辯護制度之問題與建議。月旦法學雜誌,276
  53. 黃鼎軒(2016)。協商程序之解構與重構。法學叢刊,61(2)
  54. 楊雲驊(2004)。刑事訴訟法新增「協商程序」之探討(下)。月旦法學教室,21
  55. 廖尉均(2005)。犯罪被害人刑事訴訟權利之保護。刑事法雜誌,49(4)
  56. 蔡清遊(2004)。刑事訴訟協商程序實務探討(下)。司法周刊,1195