The circumstances of confession, confession, return of stolen goods, and compensation, etc., have been confirmed in the "Sentencing Guidance Opinions". There is no obstacle for criminal suspects and d

The circumstances of confession, confession, return of stolen goods, and compensation, etc., have been confirmed in the "Sentencing Guidance Opinions". There is no obstacle for criminal suspects and defendants to form reasonable expectations for the sentencing outcome with the help of professional lawyers or explanations from prosecutors. , but it is worth studying how much room and range the prosecution and defense can negotiate on sentencing reductions. I believe that under the principle of legality of crime and punishment, sentencing negotiations between the prosecution and defense should still be based on the existing sentencing circumstances stipulated in the criminal law and relevant judicial interpretations, and the reduction range should be limited to the range determined in the "Sentencing Guidance Opinions" to avoid Phenomenons such as "paying money to buy punishment" or excessive differences in punishments for the same crime occur that undermine the unity of the law and judicial authority. However, in the process of improving the system, it is necessary to further refine the "Sentencing Guidance Opinions" to clarify the specific leniency range applicable to different stages of confession and punishment, which will be beneficial to the prosecution and defense in the sentencing results of the case. There is an expectation of convergence, and secondly, the gap between the sentencing agreement and the judge's discretion will not be too large. In addition, sentencing incentives can also be reflected in changes in coercive measures, negotiated application of fines and controls, and leniency in the application of non-custodial sentences. For criminal suspects and defendants whose crimes are minor, pose little personal risk and who actively plead guilty and accept punishment, changes in custody measures and separate fines may be considered during sentencing negotiations. Those who meet the conditions for community corrections may be leniently considered and applied. Control, probation, etc. 3. The balance between leniency expectations and litigation efficiency - the improvement of my country's leniency system for guilty pleas and punishments. The leniency system for guilty pleas and punishments exists in the entire litigation process from investigation, review and prosecution to trial, and involves the beginning of the investigation stage. The choice of guilty plea and punishment, the review of sentencing negotiations in the prosecution stage, and the voluntariness and legality review and simplification of court hearings in the trial stage. Therefore, it is necessary to make appropriate adjustments to the case handling procedures at each stage of litigation, and at the same time, a sound supporting system must be established to protect criminal suspects. , the defendant’s litigation rights.

1) Investigation stage. Encouraging and guiding criminal suspects to voluntarily and truthfully confess their crimes during the investigation phase will not weaken the investigative responsibilities of the public security organs. The public security organs should still comprehensively collect evidence and materials in accordance with the law and ascertain the facts of the case. On the contrary, voluntary confession during the investigation stage may play a positive role in preventing illegal acquisition of evidence and in solving cases quickly and efficiently. The investigative agency should inform the criminal suspect of the relevant legal provisions on leniency for confession and punishment when he or she is first interrogated or when compulsory measures are taken, and give the criminal suspect the right to initiate a request. For criminal suspects who have not appointed a defender, the on-duty lawyer should be notified promptly to provide legal consultation on matters of plea of ??guilty and punishment. Therefore, it is necessary to speed up the establishment and improvement of the legal aid duty lawyer system, ensure that defenders and duty lawyers have the right to be present during interrogations, and improve the procuratorial organs' supervision rights over investigative activities to ensure the voluntariness and legality of confessions and punishments.

2) Review and prosecution stage. For cases transferred by the investigative agency for review and prosecution that meet the leniency conditions for guilty plea and acceptance of punishment, the procuratorate should verify the voluntariness of the criminal suspect's confession and acceptance of punishment during the investigation stage and the legality of the process before reviewing the evidence materials, and then proceed with the decision on the basis of non-prosecution or conditional non-prosecution. or prosecution as required by law. For cases that should be prosecuted and meet the leniency conditions for pleading guilty and accepting punishment, the procuratorate should inform the defendant of the alleged crime, the sentencing regulations and possible sentencing results related to the facts of the case, the circumstances of the guilty plea and acceptance of punishment, and communicate with the defendant and his defender in accordance with the sentencing consultation process. Or the duty lawyer conducts sentencing negotiations and makes recommendations on sentencing and trial procedures. Matters such as return of stolen goods and compensation, criminal reconciliation, etc. that have not been handled during the investigation stage must be dealt with together during the sentencing negotiation stage. If the defendant voluntarily pleads guilty, has no objection to the alleged criminal facts and charges, and agrees with the prosecution's sentencing recommendations and trial procedure recommendations, he shall sign a recognizance letter. When prosecuting, the procuratorate shall hand over the case file materials, sentencing agreement, and recognizance letter to the court. For cases where the defendant agrees to apply summary procedures or expedited procedures, the procuratorate should also make suggestions to the court on the trial procedures when prosecuting. In order to ensure information equality during sentencing negotiations, the evidence discovery system should be improved at this stage. Defendants who reach a sentencing agreement and sign a recognizance letter should also be given the right to withdraw their guilty plea and punishment.

3) Trial stage.

For cases in which the procuratorate initiates public prosecutions in accordance with the leniency provisions for guilty plea and acceptance of punishment, the court should first confirm that there are no circumstances that should not or should not be applied to the case. For example, the defendant is a mental patient who has not completely lost the ability to recognize or control his own behavior, or a minor defendant The legal representative and defender have objections to the minor's confession and punishment, and there are other circumstances in which it is inappropriate to receive a lenient punishment due to the egregious nature of the crime, cruel means, serious social harm, etc. When the court hears a case in accordance with the leniency provisions for pleading guilty and accepting punishment, the court should focus on examining the voluntariness of the defendant's confession and acceptance of punishment and the legality of the prosecution and defense agreement, including whether the defendant has the cognitive ability and mental state to express his intention to plead guilty and accept punishment, and whether the defendant pleads guilty and accepts punishment. Whether you were threatened or induced when responding, whether you effectively participated in negotiations and fully understood the content of the agreement and the consequences of diminishing litigation rights. If the court decides to apply summary procedures or expedited procedures, it can simplify the trial accordingly, but it should protect the defendant's right to make a final statement. For cases of guilty plea and punishment, the court should generally adopt the charges charged by the public prosecution and the sentencing agreement reached by the prosecution and defense and pronounce the sentence in court. However, after the trial, the court finds that the charges in the case are inconsistent with the charges, the guilty plea and punishment are against one's will, and the proposed sentence is inconsistent with the sentencing agreement. When the gap is too large, the defendant does not commit a crime or should not be held criminally responsible, etc., the trial procedure for plea guilty and punishment cases should be promptly terminated and the trial should be converted to ordinary procedures. In fact, the confession of guilt and punishment will eventually be sentenced by the court regardless of whether it is signed or not, because the procuratorate does not have any qualifications to sentence Chinese citizens, and the sentencing opinion given by the procuratorate does not mean the final sentencing result. If you do violate the criminal law, you will eventually have to participate in the criminal trial process. If you can avoid being sentenced by signing a confession and accepting punishment, then there will be no order in society. This is all about whether the prosecutor's office will definitely impose a sentence if you plead guilty and accept punishment. All of us must be very concerned about criminal case appraisals, confessions and fines. Regarding the question of whether we will be prosecuted after signing a confession and a fine, we will not be prosecuted under normal circumstances, but if there is still something relevant Criminal violations can still be prosecuted, and the litigation process is also stipulated in our country.