刑事上訴制度之研究—以通常救濟為中心

Research on Criminal Appellate System---Focusing on Ordinary Appeals

陳靜隆(Ching-Lung Chin)

指導教授 ： 柯耀程

國立中正大學/法學院/法律學系/博士(2012年)

摘要

審級構造，應以第一審為事實審理中心，第二審為事後審，第二審上訴事由雖擴張至原審所未能審及之事證，然在事實未明或可能觸及新事證之情況，應將案件發回。第三審為嚴格法律審，不應採許可上訴制，至職權撤銷事由，恐過於擴張第三審法院職權，仍有待審慎評估。其次，若原審判決無瑕疵，應避免控方提出無謂的上訴；而在控方舉證怠惰之情形，控方如欲以新事證提起上訴，須負程序上之相對義務，說明何以未能於第一審提出證據。此外，制度上仍應持續強化被告在訴訟上之權能，落實其辯護，期能獲得公平之裁判。

關鍵字

上訴理由 ； 事後審制 ； 覆審制 ； 審級構造 ； 上訴

並列摘要

The structure of trial system should adopt the first trial as the truth trial center and the second trial as revision. Although the reason of appeal extends the evidence that original trial does not include, the case should be sent back to the first trial when the truth is unknown or the new evidence is not discovered. The third trial is the strict legal trial and should not adopt an approval system. The withdrawal of authority may over extend the authority of the third trial court, which has to be assessed carefully. Appeals from prosecutors should be prohibited if the original adjudication has no flaws, and prosecutors are under obligation to the procedure if intending to appeal but are inactive to give proof or evidence. In addition, the legal system should continue reinforcing defendants’ powers and functions on litigation to fulfill their defenses and to acquire fair adjudication.

並列關鍵字

revision ； trial de novo ； the structure of trial system ； Right to appeal ； the reasons to appeal

參考文獻

1. 王兆鵬著，刑事訴訟法講義，元照，五版，2010

3. 朱石炎著，刑事訴訟法論，三民，初版，2007

7. 林永謀著，刑事訴訟法釋論（下冊），三民，改訂版，2010

18. 黃東熊,吳景芳著，刑事訴訟法論，三民，修訂四版，2001

19. 黃朝義著，刑事訴訟法，新學林，二版，2009