- 學位論文
檢察官針對無罪判決提起上訴之探討
A discussion of prosecutors appealing against the acquittal judgment
摘要
本文之問題意識是「檢察官針對無罪判決提起上訴是否妥適？」。針對此議題，先看看我國檢察官上訴實務現況；接著觀察美國及中國大陸對於此問題之處理方法；再回到我國，依序就檢察官之上訴權機能、刑事審級制度及上訴審構造、刑事妥速審判法第8條及第9條，以及無罪推定理念之落實等角度探討之。 截至2009年8月止，屢遭檢察官提起上訴的無罪判決最終仍無罪定讞的被告人數共有41人。依2008司法統計年報所示，近10年最高法院無罪確定人數占所有上訴確定人數的比例為12.17％。此12.17，不只是個數據，對於獲判無罪的被告及其家屬來說，都是不容忽視的「唯一」。 就外國法之借鏡而言，與美國刑事訴訟實務相較，我們較為落後，因為美國檢察官原則上對於無罪判決不得提起上訴，而我們的刑事妥速審判法則是附加很多條件才禁止檢察官提起上訴；與中國大陸刑事訴訟實務相較，我們較為進步，因為我們為了維護正當程序甚至可以放棄發現真實。 2010年4月23日通過刑事妥速審判法之前，依我國現行刑事訴訟法第344條及第347條之規定，檢察官享有極為廣泛的上訴權。就無罪判決而言，檢察官乃理所當然地可以提起上訴。在刑事妥速審判法通過之後，該法第8條及第9條對於檢察官針對無罪判決提起上訴則有所限制。本文以為，刑事妥速審判法之大方向值得肯定，然而條文細節部分則值得商榷。
並列摘要
The issue of the present thesis focuses on “whether it is appropriate for a prosecutor to file an appeal against a verdict of acquittal?” The author first looks at the current appeal practice of the prosecutors in Taiwan, then provides an overview of the ways in which the United States and the Mainland China deal with such issue, and finally discusses in depth in respect to the function of a prosecutor’s right to appeal, the criminal adjudication system, the structure of the appeals, Articles 8 and 9 of the Criminal Appropriate and Speedy Trial Law and the implementation of presumption of innocence in Taiwan. Until August 2009, there are a total of 41 defendants whose verdicts of acquittal were maintained in the appeals brought against by the prosecutors. According to the judicial statistics in 2008, 12.17% of the verdicts of acquittal were upheld by the Supreme Court during the appeal in the past ten years. 12.17% is not only a statistic. For the defendants who were acquitted and their families, this number cannot be disregarded. As compared to the practice of criminal procedure in the United States, the criminal procedural laws in Taiwan are relatively under developed. This is because the prosecutors in the United States in principle cannot bring an appeal against a verdict of acquittal, whereas the Criminal Appropriate and Speedy Trial Law in Taiwan imposes numerous preconditions before forbidding a prosecutor from bringing an appeal. On the other hand, as compared to the practice of criminal procedure in the Mainland China, the criminal procedural laws in Taiwan are relatively developed, as the laws in Taiwan are willing to sacrifice the finding of truth in order to maintain the due process. Before the enactment of the Criminal Appropriate and Speedy Trial Law on April 23, 2010, according to Articles 344 and 347 of the current Code of Criminal Procedure in Taiwan, the prosecutor is entitled to a broad scope of right to appeal. In respect to a verdict of acquittal, the prosecutor is of course entitled to bring an appeal. Upon the enactment of the Criminal Appropriate and Speedy Trial Law, Articles 8 and 9 of the said Law impose certain restrictions on the prosecutor’s right to bring an appeal against a verdict of acquittal. The author believes that the general direction of the Criminal Appropriate and Speedy Trial Law deserves an applause, while the details of the provisions should be further observed.