Building The Sentencing Material Proof Rules

The new criminal procedural law and The Supreme Court’s judicial interpretation further confirmed the position to establish a relatively independent sentencing procedure in China. From the relationship of fact for sentencing and constitutive requirements for conviction, facts for sentencing can be divided into pure sentencing facts and impure sentencing facts. Besides, there is a heavier or lighter division (including being mitigated or exempted from criminal responsibility).Because the confound of impure sentencing facts and conviction facts which can not be Split, its proof methods, the burden of proof, proof standard all inevitably hold the same position with conviction facts.And for pure sentencing facts, the facts which go against the defendant (heavier sentencing facts) should still stick to strict proof standard, while, the facts beneficial to the defendant (lighter sentencing facts) should stick to free proving standard. On the burden of proof, the principle of "who advocates, who proves" should be insisted. But prosecutors would not be exempted from the responsibility under the objective obligation. On proof standard, the heavier fact under pure sentencing facts should stick to "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. While, the lighter fact under pure sentencing facts can take "preponderance of probability" standard. Besides, death penalty cases should adhere to more stringent standard.