2022-06-14 00:15:36

刑事程序法 免费编辑 添加义项名

B 添加义项
?
义项指多义词的不同概念,如李娜的义项:网球运动员、歌手等;非诚勿扰的义项:冯小刚执导电影、江苏卫视交友节目等。 查看详细规范>>
所属类别 :
词条暂无分类
编辑分类

在美国法律教育界与律师实务界,这套"美国法精要"(Nutshell Series)是颇具特色的一套小书。这套书最突出的特点当推它们的简捷明快、深入浅出。每种书均由富有教学经验的法学院教授执笔,在三、四百页的篇幅内集中介绍某一法律部门的基本原理、主要法规和重点案例。由于这些特点,这套丛书受到了无数美国读者的欢迎和喜爱。众多法学院的学生将这套书作为课外的辅助教材,由此掌握美国各主要部门法的精义。执业律师也经常借助这套书,以迅速了解自己尚未熟习的某些部门法,或者温习过去曾经学过的某些课程。

基本信息

  • 中文名称

    刑事程序法

  • 类型

    人文社科

  • 出版日期

    1999年10月1日

  • 语种

    简体中文

  • ISBN

    7503628715

  • 作者

    伊斯雷尔 拉弗维

  • 出版社

    法律出版社

  • 页数

    449 页

  • 开本

    0 开

  • 品牌

    中国法律出版社

折叠 编辑本段 基本介绍

折叠 内容简介

在美国法律教育界与律师实务界,"美国法精要"是颇具特色的一套书,其特点是简捷明快、深入浅出。美国法学院的学生将其作为课外教材,由此掌握美国各主要部门法的精义;执业律师也经常借助这套书,以迅速了解某些部门法的相关情况。我国的读者通过阅读原汁原味的英文来学习美国法律,可有效提高法律英语水平,促进与美国同行的对话与交流。

折叠 作者简介

作者:(美国)伊斯雷尔 (美国)拉弗维

杰罗德·H·以兹瑞:密执安大学法学院荣誉退休教授,全美最知名的刑事诉讼法理论权威之一。

威恩·R·拉法吾:曾任伊利诺伊大学法学院院长,现为该院荣誉退休教授。

折叠 编辑本段 媒体推荐

总 序

总 序

许传玺

在美国法律教育界与律师实务界,这套"美国法精要"(Nutshell Series)是颇具特色的一套小书。这套书最突出的特点当推它们的简捷明快、深入浅出。每种书均由富有教学经验的法学院教授执笔,在三、四百页的篇幅内集中介绍某一法律部门的基本原理、主要法规和重点案例。

由于这些特点,这套丛书受到了无数美国读者的欢迎和喜爱。众多法学院的学生将这套书作为课外的辅助教材,由此掌握美国各主要部门法的精义。执业律师也经常借助这套书,以迅速了解自己尚未熟习的某些部门法,或者温习过去曾经学过的某些课程。

相信这套书也能赢得国内读者的欢迎。无论是法律专业的本科生、研究生,还是执业律师或其他人士,都能从这套丛书中获得有关美国法律的大量知识,对自己的学习和工作有所助益。此外,通过阅读原汁原味的英文来学习美国法律也应能提高读者的法律英语水平,促进与美国同行的对话和交流。

应原出版者的要求,这套丛书的国内版增加了中文前言,以介绍美国部门法的概况、每种书的内容及原书作者。这些前言作者都是在美国受过专业教育或从事专门研究的中国法律学者甚或专家。相信他们的介绍会对读者有所帮助。

Happy reading!

1999年4月

于哈佛法学院

折叠 编辑本段 图书目录

PREFACE

TABLE OF CASES

Chapter 1 The Constitutionalization of Criminal Procedure

Chapter 2 Arrest,Search and Seizure

Chapter 3 Wiretapping,Electronic Eavesdropping,and the Use of Secret Agents

Chapter 4 Police Interrogation and Confessions

Chapter 5 Lineups and Other Pretrial Identification Procedures

Chapter 6 The Exclusionary Rules and Their Application

Chapter 7 Right to Counsel

Chapter 8 The Post-Investigatory Process:From Bail to Appellate Review

折叠 编辑本段 文摘

书摘

(b) Restricting Linkletter: Full retroactivity

prior to conviction finality

Starting with U.S.v. Johnson (1982), a series of cases overturned Linkletter as to proceedings that had not yet reached the point where a conviction became final. Johnson held that full retroactivity was required prior to the point of conviction finality as to new Fourth Amendment rulings. Sheav.La (1985) held that this requirement was not limited to Fourth Amendment rulings, and Griffith v.

Ky: (1987) held that it applied even where the new ruling constituted a "clear break" from past precedent. For the purpose of this line of cases, a conviction did not become final until "the availability of appeal [was] exhausted and the time for a petition for certiorari [to the Supreme Court] elapsed or a petition was denied." Thus, a new ruling was now given retroactive effect (1) to all

cases that came to trial after the date of the new ruling even if the operative event had occurred beforehand, and (2) to prior adjudications that had

resulted in a conviction where the opportunity for direct appellate review (through to petition for certiorari) was still available.

The Johnson line of cases offered several reasons for rejecting the Linkletter analysis insofar as it applied to cases not yet final. To fail to apply a newly adopted rule to a prosecution that had not yet come to trial or was still pending upon direct appellate review would be contrary to "basic norms of constitutional adjudication." It undermines the integrity of judicial review to "simply fish * * * one case from the stream of appellate review, using it as a vehicle for pronouncing new constitutional standards, and then permitting a stream of similar

cases subsequently to flow by unaffected by the new rule." So too, such selective application of the new rule was said to violate "the principle of treating similarly situated defendants the same." As earlier critics had noted, giving the benefit of the new rule to the defendant whose case constituted the vehicle for announcing the rule and denying it to others whose cases were at the same stage

could result in "different standards for the protection of constitutional rights * * * [being] applied to two defendants simultaneously tried in the same courthouse for similar offenses." Dissenters maintained that the lihe the majority was drawing, between final and non-final cases, was equally based on the fortuity of timing and produced an inequality in the treatment of like cases as great as

that which arose under the Linkletter approach.The Court majority, however, found a greater sense of consistency provided where the distinction was tied to an appellate court's responsibility "to resolve all cases before us on direct review in light of our best understanding of governing constitutional principle."

折叠 编辑本段 序言

在美国法律教育界与律师实务界,这套"美国法精要"(Nutshell Series)是颇具特色的一套小书。这套书最突出的特点当推它们的简捷明快、深入浅出。每种书均由富有教学经验的法学院教授执笔,在三、四百页的篇幅内集中介绍某一法律部门的基本原理、主要法规和重点案例。

由于这些特点,这套丛书受到了无数美国读者的欢迎和喜爱。众多法学院的学生将这套书作为课外的辅助教材,由此掌握美国各主要部门法的精义。执业律师也经常借助这套书,以迅速了解自己尚未熟习的某些部门法,或者温习过去曾经学过的某些课程。

相信这套书也能赢得国内读者的欢迎。无论是法律专业的本科生、研究生,还是执业律师或其他人士,都能从这套丛书中获得有关美国法律的大量知识,对自己的学习和工作有所助益。此外,通过阅读原汁原味的英文来学习美国法律也应能提高读者的法律英语水平,促进与美国同行的对话和交流。

应原出版者的要求,这套丛书的国内版增加了中文前言,以介绍美国部门法的概况、每种书的内容及原书作者。这些前言作者都是在美国受过专业教育或从事专门研究的中国法律学者甚或专家。相信他们的介绍会对读者有所帮助。

阅读全文

热点资讯

我的关注