再犯的认定——以胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案为例毒品

The Identification of drug recidivism——Based on “Hu intentional injury, drug trafficking case”

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属院系:

法学院

作者:

陈丹

导师:

黄开诚

导师单位:

法学院

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

毒品再犯;累犯;罪刑法定;宽严相济

摘要:

毒品犯罪十分猖獗,毒犯中的再犯现象也比较严重。自《刑法修正案(八)》规定未成年人犯罪不构成累犯后,学界和司法实务界对未成年人涉毒犯罪是否构成毒品再犯也展开了讨论,争议极大。本文以胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案为例,对相关问题进行研究。本文主要分为四部分。第一部分,介绍案件的基本情况。根据法院的判决书简要地介绍了胡某某等故意伤害和贩卖毒品的事实。同时通过概括本案相关问题的分歧意见,得出主要的争议焦点是胡某某是否构成毒品再犯以及法院在决定胡某某的执行刑时是否要再考量其再犯情节。第二部分,主要通过对罪刑法定原则、宽严相济的刑事政策、当然解释以及禁止重复评价原则等与案件争议焦点相关的重要刑法理论进行分析并提出自己的见解。从宽严相济的刑事政策对毒品犯罪从严,对未成年人犯罪从宽的内涵出发和当然解释的运用来分析胡某某是否构成毒品再犯。通过对禁止重复评价原则内涵的理解来剖析胡某某的再犯情节是否可以再次考量。第三部分,该部分为本案的分析与结论。结合胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案的具体案情和第二部分介绍的相关法理,对胡某某是否构成毒品再犯进行层层递进的分析。首先,通过指出我国刑法第356条对主体规定的不明,引出有利于胡某某的类推;将未成年人犯罪的特殊性和毒品犯罪的特殊性相结合,推出对胡某某毒品犯罪应当从宽处理;通过将胡某某的行为与累犯相比较,推出胡某某不构成毒品再犯。其次,通过运用禁止重复评价原则来论证不应当对胡某某的再犯情节再次考量。第四部分,主要的启示有:在司法上,建议司法人员正确理解整体从严打击毒品犯罪的含义,避免一刀切的处理态度;在处理案件时,要从法律的精神实质上去理解法律条文;在立法上,建议立法机关明确规定未成年人犯罪不构成毒品再犯和我国刑法第69条中“酌定”的内容。

学科:

刑法学

提交日期

2019-04-11

引用参考

陈丹. 再犯的认定——以胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案为例毒品[D]. 西南政法大学,2014.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 再犯的认定——以胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案为例毒品
  • dc.title
  • The Identification of drug recidivism——Based on “Hu intentional injury, drug trafficking case”
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20120351021551
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 陈丹
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法律硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2014
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 黄开诚
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 法学院
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 毒品再犯;;累犯;;罪刑法定;;宽严相济
  • dc.subject
  • Drug recidivism;Recidivism;Legality;Alternate leniency with severity;Juvenile delinquency
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 毒品犯罪十分猖獗,毒犯中的再犯现象也比较严重。自《刑法修正案(八)》规定未成年人犯罪不构成累犯后,学界和司法实务界对未成年人涉毒犯罪是否构成毒品再犯也展开了讨论,争议极大。本文以胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案为例,对相关问题进行研究。本文主要分为四部分。第一部分,介绍案件的基本情况。根据法院的判决书简要地介绍了胡某某等故意伤害和贩卖毒品的事实。同时通过概括本案相关问题的分歧意见,得出主要的争议焦点是胡某某是否构成毒品再犯以及法院在决定胡某某的执行刑时是否要再考量其再犯情节。第二部分,主要通过对罪刑法定原则、宽严相济的刑事政策、当然解释以及禁止重复评价原则等与案件争议焦点相关的重要刑法理论进行分析并提出自己的见解。从宽严相济的刑事政策对毒品犯罪从严,对未成年人犯罪从宽的内涵出发和当然解释的运用来分析胡某某是否构成毒品再犯。通过对禁止重复评价原则内涵的理解来剖析胡某某的再犯情节是否可以再次考量。第三部分,该部分为本案的分析与结论。结合胡某某等故意伤害、贩卖毒品案的具体案情和第二部分介绍的相关法理,对胡某某是否构成毒品再犯进行层层递进的分析。首先,通过指出我国刑法第356条对主体规定的不明,引出有利于胡某某的类推;将未成年人犯罪的特殊性和毒品犯罪的特殊性相结合,推出对胡某某毒品犯罪应当从宽处理;通过将胡某某的行为与累犯相比较,推出胡某某不构成毒品再犯。其次,通过运用禁止重复评价原则来论证不应当对胡某某的再犯情节再次考量。第四部分,主要的启示有:在司法上,建议司法人员正确理解整体从严打击毒品犯罪的含义,避免一刀切的处理态度;在处理案件时,要从法律的精神实质上去理解法律条文;在立法上,建议立法机关明确规定未成年人犯罪不构成毒品再犯和我国刑法第69条中“酌定”的内容。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • Drug crime is rampant, and drug recidivism phenomenon is very serious. Since the "the Eighth Amendment to Criminal Law " rules that the minor crime does not constitute recidivism,the academic circle and judicial practice circle make a controversial discussion that whether juvenile drug-related crime constitutes drug recidivism. This paper studies the related issues, with an example of Hu intentional injury, drug trafficking case .This paper is divided into four parts. Part One:Introduction of the basic situation of the case. According to the court verdict ,this section briefly introduces the fact that Hu deliberately hurt others and committed the crime of drug trafficking. Through summarizing the differences on related issues to the case ,it is concluded that the main focus of controversy are whether Hu's behavior constitutes drug recidivism and whether Hu's repeat crime plot should be considered again when executing punishment. Part Two: This section descripes the principle of legality, criminal policy of alternate leniency with severity, natural interpretation, principle of prohibiting repeatable evaluation, which are important criminal theories related to the case focus of controversy ,and then put forward the author's opinions. The paper analyzes whether the minor crime constitutes drug recidivism from natural interpretation and the criminal policy which sentences drug crime severely, the minor crime leniently. At the same time,based on the understanding of principle of prohibiting repeatable evaluation, the paper explores that whether recidivism plot should be considered again when executing punishment. Part Three: Analysis and conclusion of this case. Combining the specific details of the case and criminal theories related to, the paper makes the progressive analysis around the focus of controversy that whether Hu's behavior constitutes drug recidivism. Firstly, by pointing out the subject of China's criminal law 356th is uncertain, the paper gets an analogy which is beneficial for Hu; Combining the particularity of the minor crime and drug crime, it is inferred that Hu drug crimes should be punished leniently;Comparing Hu's behavior with recidivism,it is inferred that Hu does not constitutes drug recidivism. Secondly, applying principle of prohibiting repeatable evaluation,it is concluded that Hu's recidivism plot should not be considered again.Part Four: Enlightenment. It is suggested that the judicial personnel should understand the meaning of the fight against drug crime strictly on the whole, thus avoiding one size fits all. In the trial of cases, the judicial personnel should understand the spiritual essence of the law . In the legislation, the legislature should rule clearly that the minor crime does not constitute drug recidivism and "discretionary" content of China's criminal law 356th.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-03-23
  • dc.date.oralDefense
  • 2014-05-10
  • dc.relation.relatedpublications
  • 目 录
回到顶部