| There are no clear legal provisions and procedural design to deal with the phenomenon that the defendant in the criminal quick judgment case,based on the "technical appeal" and "strategic appeal",leads to the imbalance of the policy of lenient punishment,the appeal becomes formality,the procedure is in a "idling" state and the alienation of the right of appeal.Due to the fact that there may be wrong judgment and involuntary confession in the current criminal quick adjudication procedure,appeal is conducive to the realization of minimum justice and strengthening the authority of adjudication,and the defendant’s right of appeal should be preserved.However,in order to give full play to the value of the efficiency of the rapid criminal adjudication,save judicial resources and balance the sentencing policy,we should reasonably limit the defendant’s right of appeal on the basis of retaining the defendant’s right of appeal,and reasonably limit the defendant’s right of appeal in line with the leniency system of pleading guilty and admitting punishment,which is in line with the concept of criminal justice and is conducive to improving the efficiency of litigation.As an effective measure to restrict the right of appeal in criminal quick adjudication,the examination license should be reasonably allocated in terms of substantive conditions and procedural operation on the basis of the consistency of the right allocation,the "Pareto optimality" in the economic sense and the reference of foreign experience.Finally,in order to ensure the effective implementation of the examination permission,we should also improve the voluntary guarantee mechanism of criminal suspects and defendants,the mechanism of examination anddetermination,the mechanism of consultation on sentencing in criminal quick adjudication procedure,the mechanism of procedure turning and procedure linking. |
