21. Which of the following statements about the meaning of fair criminal procedure is incorrect?
A. Litigation participants can fully and effectively participate in the litigation
B. Redress can be obtained if the procedure is illegal
C. The criminal proceedings can be attended
D. The result of the criminal proceedings is consistent with the truth
Answer: D
Test point: Understanding the meaning of procedural justice
Analysis: This question tests the understanding of procedural justice: Understanding the connotation of procedural justice
Detailed explanation: This question examines the relationship between procedural justice and substantive justice, especially It is the understanding of procedural justice. ABC is a manifestation of procedural justice, while D is a manifestation of substantive justice. Procedural justice has nothing to do with whether the criminal verdict is consistent with the truth. Truth is one of the independent values ??of procedural justice.
Comments: This is a purely theoretical question, but the difficulty is moderate. The key is to grasp the independence of procedural justice. This also puts forward higher requirements for candidates reviewing for the judicial examination: focusing on theoretical foundations. train.
22. A certain court decided to open a hearing on Zhang’s corruption case. The defendant Zhang died suddenly of a heart attack before the trial. How should the court handle this?
A． Decided to withdraw the lawsuit
B. Declare defendant Zhang innocent
C. Decided to terminate the trial
D. Return the case to the People's Procuratorate that initiated the prosecution
Answer: A
B
C
D. C
Test point: Statutory circumstances in which criminal liability is not pursued
Detailed explanation: Article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that criminal liability will not be pursued in any of the following circumstances. If there is any of the following circumstances, criminal responsibility will not be pursued; if the case has been investigated, the case should be dismissed, or no prosecution should be terminated, or the trial should be terminated, or the case should be acquitted: (1) The circumstances are obviously minor, the harm is not great, and it is not considered a crime; (2) The crime has passed the statute of limitations for prosecution; (3) The person has been exempted from punishment by an amnesty order; (4) The crime must be prosecuted according to the criminal law, but has not been prosecuted or withdrawn; (5) The death of the criminal suspect or defendant 5) The criminal suspect or defendant dies; (6) Other legal provisions exempt him from criminal liability.
It can be seen from the fifth paragraph that the defendant Zhang died suddenly of a heart attack before the trial or during the trial, and the trial was either terminated or acquitted. Article 176 of the Judicial Interpretation of the Court further explains that the People's Court shall make separate rulings based on the specific circumstances of the case: (9) If the defendant dies, the People's Court shall rule to terminate the trial: If the facts of the case and the identified evidence materials can confirm the defendant's innocence, a ruling will be made to acquit the defendant. On the surface, both B and C appear to be correct. But upon closer inspection, C is correct. Because it has been clearly explained in this case that the defendant Zhang died of a heart attack before the trial. According to the spirit of Article 15 of the Criminal Procedure Law, there is no need for the court to hold a trial, and there is no need to find out. It is impossible to establish the facts and evidence of the case and confirm the guilt or innocence of the defendant, so the case can only be dismissed.
Comments: There is a certain degree of difficulty. On the surface, it seems relatively simple, but the question sets a trap, that is, the defendant Zhang died of a heart attack before the trial. Candidates should pay attention to the key point "before the trial."
23.Which of the following should be under the jurisdiction of military courts?
A. Kuang, an active soldier, is suspected of stealing national military secrets with He, an employee of an enterprise****
B. Shi, an active soldier, committed intentional injury before joining the army and was not dealt with
C. Retired soldier Li returned to his hometown and committed the crime of theft while serving in the army. After being found out, it was not dealt with
D. Zhang, who came to the army to visit a friend, committed the crime of theft
Answer: A
Analysis: The knowledge point tested in this question is the crime of theft: A
Test point: Military The jurisdiction of the court
Detailed explanation: Article 20 of the Supreme Court Interpretation stipulates that if active military personnel (including internal military staff, the same below) and non-military criminals commit the same crime, they shall be prosecuted by the military court and the local police respectively. Jurisdiction of the People's Court or other specialized courts: If national military secrets are involved, the entire case shall be under the jurisdiction of the military court. Clearly A meets this requirement. Article 21 of the Supreme Court Interpretation stipulates that the following cases shall be under the jurisdiction of local people's courts or other specialized courts other than military courts: (1) crimes committed by non-soldiers or family members accompanying the military in military camps; (2) crimes committed by military personnel after completing retirement procedures (3) Crimes committed by active-duty service members before joining the army (except those that need to be combined with crimes committed during service); (4) Crimes committed by retired service members during their service (except for crimes committed by service members who violate their duties). Item B belongs to the (third) situation. It should be noted that the question does not indicate whether he committed other crimes during his military service, which needs to be tried together with the crimes committed during his military service. In this case, the author It is advocated that there is no other crime; item C belongs to the (fourth) situation. It should be noted that the question clearly states that the crime committed is theft, which is obviously not a crime of military breach of duty; item D belongs to the first situation .
Comments: The difficulty level is moderate. This question requires special attention to the "crime" committed by the criminal suspect, which is also an important criterion for judging the jurisdiction of military courts.
24. When Chief Prosecutor Zhang of a certain city's procuratorate was handling a bribery case, he discovered that one of the suspects was his cousin, so he applied to recuse himself, and the chief prosecutor agreed. Which of the following statements about the evidence obtained before applying for recusal and the effects of litigation actions is correct?
A. The evidence obtained and the litigation actions carried out are invalid
B. The evidence obtained and the litigation actions carried out are both valid
C. The evidence obtained is valid, but the litigation actions carried out are invalid
D. Whether the evidence obtained and the litigation actions carried out are valid shall be decided by the Procuratorial Committee or the Chief Prosecutor
Answer: D
Test point: Legal consequences of investigators applying for recusal
Detailed explanation: The Criminal Procedure Law stipulates the circumstances under which recusal is warranted and the consequences of investigators applying for recusal: Article 28 of the Criminal Procedure Law It stipulates that judges, prosecutors, and investigators shall recuse themselves under any of the following circumstances, and the parties and their agents ad litem have the right to request that they recuse themselves: (1) They are the parties or close relatives of the parties; (2) They have the right to request evaded by investigators. The party or a close relative of the party; (2) The person or his close relative has an interest in the case; (3) Has served as a witness, appraiser, defender, or litigation agent in the case; (4) Has other relationships with the party in the case that may affect the case The case was handled fairly. Article 30, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that investigators shall not stop investigating a case before making a decision to recuse themselves. In this regard, Article 30 of the "Senior Procuratorate Rules" further stipulates that prosecutors who are decided to recuse themselves due to one of the circumstances stipulated in Articles 28 and 29 of the Criminal Procedure Law shall obtain the necessary information before making the decision to recuse themselves. Whether the evidence and the implemented litigation actions are valid shall be decided by the Procuratorial Committee or the Chief Prosecutor based on the specific circumstances of the case. Obviously, in this case, when prosecutor Zhang was handling a bribery case, he discovered that one of the criminal suspects was his cousin. With the consent of the chief prosecutor, he applied for recusal on his own initiative, which fell under Article 28 of the Criminal Procedure Law. A specified situation.
According to Article 30 of the "High Procuratorate Rules", the evidence validity and litigation effect of Zhang's litigation actions before applying for recusal shall be determined by the Procuratorial Committee or the Chief Prosecutor. Therefore option D is correct.
Comments: Moderate difficulty, focus on the content of Article 30 of the High Inspection Rules.
25. Which of the following statements about the differences between defenders and litigation attorneys in criminal proceedings are correct?
A. The time to intervene in litigation is different
B. The scope of persons who can serve as defenders and litigation agents is different
C. It is different whether you appear in court or not
D. They have different criminal litigation functions
Answer: A: D
Test point: The difference between defenders and litigation agents in criminal proceedings
Analysis: This question tests the differences between defenders and litigation agents Differences between attorneys ad litem: This question briefly examines the differences between defenders and attorneys ad litem in criminal proceedings, without distinguishing between public prosecutions and private prosecutions. First of all, it needs to be made clear that under normal circumstances, there is no difference in the intervention time between the two. According to Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Law, victims of public prosecution cases, their legal representatives, and close relatives, and parties to attached civil lawsuits and their legal representatives have the right to entrust litigation agents from the date the case is transferred for review and prosecution. people. Private prosecutors and their agents ad litem in private prosecution cases, and parties to incidental civil lawsuits and their agents ad litem have the right to entrust agents ad litem at any time. Article 33 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that criminal suspects in public prosecution cases have the right to entrust a defender from the date the case is transferred for review and prosecution. The defendant in a private prosecution case has the right to entrust a defender at any time. It can be seen from this that public prosecution cases can participate in litigation from the date they are transferred for review and prosecution; private prosecution cases can participate in litigation at any time. Therefore, item A is wrong;
Secondly, regarding the scope of defenders and litigation agents, the law does not clearly differentiate between them. Articles 32 and 41 of the Criminal Procedure Law have clear provisions on this. Article 32: In addition to exercising their own defense rights, criminal suspects and defendants may entrust one or two people to serve as defenders. The following persons may be designated as defenders: (1) Lawyers; (2) People recommended by people's organizations or the unit where the criminal suspect or defendant works; (3) Guardians, relatives and friends of the criminal suspect or defendant. Persons who are being sentenced or whose personal freedom is deprived or restricted in accordance with the law shall not serve as defenders. Article 41 The appointment of an agent ad litem shall be governed by the provisions of Article 32 of this Law. Article 33 of the Supreme Court Interpretation further restricts the scope of defenders. At the same time, Article 47 of the Interpretation stipulates that if a party entrusts a litigation agent, refer to Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Law and this Article. The provisions of Article 33 shall be interpreted and implemented. Therefore, the scope of persons who can serve as defenders and litigation agents is the same, and item B is obviously wrong.
Third, regarding whether the defender and litigation agent appear in court. The answer is very clear. Both have the right to appear in court, participate in court investigations and debates. For example, Article 155 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that after the public prosecutor reads the indictment in court, the defendant and the victim may make statements about the crimes charged in the indictment, and the public prosecutor may interrogate the defendant. The victim, the plaintiff in the incidental civil action, the defender and the litigation agent may ask questions to the defendant with the permission of the presiding judge. The trial judge may question the defendant. Therefore C is wrong. The difference in litigation functions between the two is the essential difference: Article 35 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the defender’s duty is to provide materials and opinions that prove the innocence of the criminal suspect or defendant, reduce or exempt the criminal liability, and maintain the The legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants. Article 48 of the Supreme Court Interpretation stipulates that the duty of an agent ad litem is to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the victim, private prosecutor or party to incidental civil litigation based on facts and law. Therefore option D is correct.
Comments: Moderate difficulty. This question is highly theoretical and examines the difference between defense and agency as well as ****.
26. Which of the following is direct evidence?
A. Han’s murder case, witness testimony proving that the defendant was at the crime scene
B. Ma’s theft case, victim Chen’s statement about the material losses caused by the crime
C. In the case of Gao’s arson, the video proved that the fire was caused by an electrical short circuit
D. In the case of Wu’s poisoning, the identification conclusion proved that the defendant’s fingerprints were the same as those extracted at the scene
Answer: C
Test point: The criminal suspect’s confession
Identification conclusion: C
Test point: direct evidence and indirect evidence Difference
Detailed explanation: Based on the probative relationship between the evidence and the main facts of the case, the evidence can be divided into direct evidence and indirect evidence. The main fact in a criminal case is whether the criminal suspect or defendant has committed a criminal act, that is, "criminal facts and criminal acts." The so-called difference in proof relationship refers to whether a certain piece of evidence can independently and directly prove the main facts of the case. Any evidence that can independently and directly prove the main facts of the case is direct evidence. It refers to the content of a certain piece of evidence that can intuitively explain whether the alleged crime occurred and whether the crime was committed by the person being prosecuted without going through the process of reasoning. Any evidence that must be combined with other evidence to prove a major fact of the case is circumstantial evidence. In connection with this question, in the Han Moumou murder case, the witness testimony proving that the defendant was at the crime scene cannot alone prove the main facts of the case, so item A is indirect evidence; in the Ma Moumou theft case, the victim Chen Moumou The statement that the crime caused material damage to him only reveals part of the facts of the case, because the statement only refers to the harmful consequences of the crime (criminal act) and does not identify the perpetrator. In the poisoning case of Wu in Case D, the identification conclusion proving that the defendant's fingerprints were the same as those extracted at the scene could only prove that the defendant was at the scene at the time, but could not prove that the defendant had poisoned himself, so it was also indirect evidence. In the arson case involving Gao in Case C, the video showed that the fire was caused by an electrical short circuit, which revealed the main facts of the case, that is, there was a perpetrator and there were criminal facts. In Case C, the video showed that the fire was caused by an electrical short circuit, which revealed the main facts of the case, namely the perpetrator and the consequences of the crime (i.e., the criminal act), and therefore was direct evidence.
Commentary: The difficulty is moderate, and this question is a highly theoretical test point. When grasping the difference between direct evidence and indirect evidence, attention should be paid to distinguishing it from the difference between original evidence and hearsay evidence.
27. Which of the following statements about judicial detention, administrative detention and criminal detention are correct?
A． Judicial detention is a coercive measure that hinders litigation, and administrative detention is a method of administrative punishment. Judicial detention and administrative detention are both held in administrative detention centers: Criminal detention is a coercive measure, and criminal detention is held in a detention center
B. Judicial detention, administrative detention, and criminal detention are all punishments
C. Judicial detention, administrative detention, and criminal detention are all compulsory measures
D. Judicial detention, administrative detention and criminal detention can all be decided by the public security organs
Answer: CA
Test point: The differences and **** between judicial detention, administrative detention and criminal detention
p>Detailed explanation: The fundamental difference between judicial detention, administrative detention and criminal detention is reflected in the difference in nature. Judicial detention is an exclusionary measure that is taken against serious acts that impede judicial activities. Criminal detention is a safeguard measure in criminal proceedings and a litigation act. Its purpose is to ensure the smooth progress of criminal proceedings and is not punitive in itself. Administrative detention is a form of punishment in public security management and is essentially a form of punishment. An administrative penalty whose purpose is to punish and educate general offenders. Accordingly, both items BC are incorrect and fail to distinguish the nature of the three types of detention, while item A is correct. In addition, criminal detention is decided by the public security organs and the People's Procuratorate in accordance with the law, and is implemented by the public security organs.
Article 61 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that the public security organs may first detain active criminals or major suspects under any of the following circumstances: (1) They are preparing to commit a crime, committing a crime, or are discovered after committing a crime; (2) The victim or witnesses present identify that a crime is being committed; (3) Evidence of a crime is found near him or at his residence; (4) He attempts suicide, escapes or is at large after committing a crime; (5) There is evidence of a crime. (5) There is the possibility of destroying, forging evidence or colluding with confessions; (6) Not telling the true name and address, and the identity is unknown; (7) Being suspected of committing a major crime, committing crimes on the run, committing crimes multiple times, and committing crimes in groups. Article 132 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that cases directly accepted by the People's Procuratorate that comply with the provisions of Article 60 of the Criminal Procedure Law, as well as those who have attempted suicide, escaped, or are at large after committing a crime, or who have destroyed, forged evidence, or colluded with each other, etc. If possible, if a criminal suspect needs to be arrested or detained, the decision will be made by the People’s Procuratorate and implemented by the public security organs. Judicial detention is generally decided by the People's Court in accordance with the law and executed by the Judicial Police of the People's Court. So item D is also wrong.
Comment: This is an interdisciplinary and comprehensive test question. Candidates are required to integrate and summarize based on the test points during review.
28. Zhang was put on file for investigation on suspicion of poisoning and murder. Considering that Zhang was pregnant and about to give birth, the county public security organ decided to release him on bail pending trial and ordered him to pay a deposit of 3,000 yuan. One month after the child was born, Chang wrote a suicide note and failed to commit suicide twice. The family took turns taking care of Chang and the child to prevent accidents. In this case, what coercive measures should be taken against Zhang?
A. Maintain the original decision to be released on bail pending trial
B. Change bail pending trial to residential surveillance
C. Increase the bail pending trial deposit or change it to a security deposit
D. Request to the People's Procuratorate for approval of arrest in accordance with the law
Answer: D
Test point: Request to the People's Procuratorate for approval of arrest in accordance with the law: D
Test point: Change of compulsory measures
Answer: D: Change of compulsory measures
Detailed explanation: This question examines the change of compulsory measures, which refers to the adoption of bail pending trial but is not enough to prevent social danger. At the same time, Zhang is suspected of poisoning and killing. may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment or more. Article 60 of the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that for criminal suspects and defendants who have evidence to prove the facts of the crime and may be sentenced to a sentence of imprisonment or above, if bail pending trial or residential surveillance are not enough to prevent social danger and need to be arrested, they shall be arrested. They should be arrested in accordance with the law. Therefore, Zhang should apply to the People's Procuratorate for approval of arrest in accordance with the law.
Comment: Although changing mandatory measures is a complex issue, the topic is relatively simple because the knowledge points involved are relatively simple.
29. A certain county procuratorate prosecuted Sun for robbery, and the victim Li filed an incidental civil lawsuit. Which of the following statements is correct?
A. Trials with attached civil litigation shall be governed by the Civil Procedure Law, but not by the Criminal Procedure Law
B. Although Sun and Li have reached a compensation agreement during the investigation stage and Sun has paid the compensation, the court can still accept the incidental civil lawsuit filed by Li.
C. In the incidental civil lawsuit, the procuratorate decided to seize the defendant’s property
D. If a mediation agreement is reached, the court must prepare a mediation letter after completing its implementation
Answer: B: B
Test point: Criminal incidental civil litigation procedures
Detailed explanation: First of all, it is necessary What is clear is that due to the "incidental" nature of incidental civil litigation, it is first necessary to make it clear that when trying incidental civil litigation cases, due to the "incidental" nature of incidental civil litigation, the Criminal Procedure Law "Criminal Incidental Civil Litigation" should be applied. "Litigation"; and since the nature of incidental civil litigation is civil litigation, the relevant provisions of the law should be applied to civil litigation that is not provided for in the Criminal Procedure Law. Therefore item A is wrong. Secondly, regarding mediation with civil litigation, we should pay attention to three aspects: the stages of mediation, the preparation of mediation documents, and the issue of estoppel after mediation. This topic is studied as a whole.
According to Article 90 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, during the investigation, pre-trial, review and prosecution stages, the right holder who files an incidental civil lawsuit submits a compensation request to the public security agency and the People's Procuratorate, and the request has been filed with the public security agency and the People's Procuratorate. After the criminal case is prosecuted, the People's Court The case should be filed as an incidental civil lawsuit; after mediation by the public security organ or the People's Procuratorate, the parties have reached an agreement and have paid compensation. If the victim insists on filing an incidental civil lawsuit in court, the People's Court may also accept the case. Accordingly, mediation with civil litigation can be carried out at the investigation, prosecution and trial stages, while court mediation is final and the first two have no legal effect, so B is obviously correct. According to Article 96 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, mediation may be conducted in cases of incidental civil litigation, except where the People's Procuratorate initiates a public prosecution. Mediation should be conducted on a voluntary and legal basis. If an agreement is reached through mediation, the judges shall prepare a mediation letter in a timely manner. Mediation will be legally effective upon signature by both parties. If the mediation agreement is completed and the court presides over the mediation, the mediation document does not need to be produced, but it should be recorded in the transcript and signed or sealed by the parties, judges, and clerks, and it will be legally effective. It can be seen from this that item D is wrong and incidental civil litigation mediation may not necessarily result in a mediation letter. The third question is that according to Article 95 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, when hearing an incidental civil lawsuit, the people's court may rule to seal up or detain the defendant's property when necessary. Therefore, the title of Item C, "In an incidental civil litigation case, the prosecutor's office decided to seize the defendant's property" is obviously wrong. The reason is that incidental civil litigation is essentially a civil litigation, and the procuratorate, as the public prosecution agency, should not interfere with the seizure of property.
Comments: This question involves a series of related issues related to criminal litigation, such as legal application issues, mediation issues of incidental civil litigation, property seizure issues, etc. If you are not careful, you may make mistakes, so it is relatively difficult. big. Therefore, the author recommends that candidates must summarize and summarize certain knowledge points.
30. Gao sued Fan to the county court for defamation. After review, the county court held that the case should be under the jurisdiction of this court. The case had a clear defendant, specific litigation claims and evidence that could prove the defendant's criminal facts, and should be accepted. However, the whereabouts of the defendant Fan are currently unknown. How should the court deal with this?
A. Decided to suspend the trial
B. Persuade the private prosecutor to withdraw the lawsuit or rule to dismiss the lawsuit
C. Declare Fan guilty of defamation and impose penalties
D. Transfer the case to the public security organs to find out Fan’s whereabouts
Answer: B
Test points: Determination and punishment of defamation crime
D. B
Test point: Defamation: The People’s Court’s review and handling of private prosecution cases
Analysis: This question examines the People’s Court’s review and handling of private prosecution cases: In this question, Gao filed a case for defamation. A county court sued Fan. According to Article 1 of the Supreme Court Interpretation: Private prosecution cases directly accepted by the People's Court include: (1) Cases that are handled only on complaint: 1. Insult and defamation cases (Criminal Law Article 246 stipulated, except those that seriously endanger social order and national interests);... This means that this case is a private prosecution case. Regarding the People's Court's review and handling of private prosecution cases, Article 188 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court provides detailed provisions: For a private prosecution case, if the People's Court finds any of the following circumstances after review, it shall persuade the private prosecutor to withdraw the prosecution or rule to dismiss it Prosecution: (1) The conditions stipulated in Article 186 of this Interpretation are not met; (2) The evidence is insufficient; (3) The crime has passed the statute of limitations for prosecution; (4) The defendant is dead; (5) The defendant The whereabouts of the person are unknown; (6) In addition to withdrawing the prosecution due to insufficient evidence, the private prosecutor also notified the same fact after withdrawing the prosecution; (7) After the case was concluded through mediation by the People's Court, the private prosecutor regretted and notified the same fact again. The current whereabouts of the defendant Fan in this case are unknown, which meets the requirements of item 5. Therefore, the court should persuade the private prosecutor to withdraw the prosecution or rule to dismiss the prosecution. B is correct. Candidates also need to pay attention to an important issue. If it is a public prosecution case and the whereabouts of the defendant Fan is unknown, the result will be different.
According to the first paragraph of Article 117 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court, if a public prosecution case does not fall under the jurisdiction of the court or the defendant is not on the case, it shall be returned to the People's Procuratorate after review.
Commentary: This question is not difficult, but you should pay attention to the hidden dangers - this case is a private prosecution case. If it is a public prosecution case, the result will be very different.
31. The public security organ of a certain county received a complaint from Sun, claiming that He had committed a coercive act against him. After review, it was determined that He did not commit a crime of committing a coercive act against him. How should the county public security agency handle it?
A． The case will not be filed
B. Request Sun to withdraw the lawsuit
C. Withdraw the case
D. After the investigation is completed, the case will be transferred to the procuratorate, which will make a decision not to prosecute
Answer: A
: A
Test point: Case filing by the public security agency
p>
Detailed explanation: Article 15 of my country’s Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that criminal liability will not be pursued if one of the following circumstances occurs. When pursuing criminal liability, if the investigation has already been carried out, the case should be dismissed, or no prosecution should be carried out, or the trial should be terminated, or the case should be acquitted: (1) The circumstances are obviously minor and the harm is not great, and it is not considered a crime; (2) The crime has passed the statute of limitations for prosecution. (3) The person is exempted from punishment by special pardon; (4) The crime is dealt with only upon complaint in accordance with the Criminal Law, but no complaint is made or the complaint is withdrawn; (5) The criminal suspect or defendant dies; (6) The person is exempted from other legal provisions be held criminally responsible. Therefore, if one of the above five situations exists, the case will generally not be filed during the investigation stage. However, Article 162 of the "Procedure Regulations for the Handling of Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs" further stipulates: After the public security organ accepts the case, if upon review it is determined that there are criminal facts that require criminal liability and it falls within the jurisdiction of the agency, the accepting unit shall prepare a "Criminal Case" The case will be filed with the approval of the person in charge of the public security organ at or above the county level. If it is believed that there are no criminal facts, or the circumstances of the crime are obviously minor and do not require criminal liability, or there are other circumstances that do not require criminal liability, the accepting unit shall prepare a "Report on Refusal to Filing a Case", which shall be approved by the person in charge of the public security organ at or above the county level. The case will not be filed. Therefore, if the public security organ believes that there are no criminal facts, or the circumstances of the crime are obviously minor and do not require criminal liability, or there are other circumstances that do not require criminal liability according to law, the case will not be filed.
Comment: The question is a bit biased. It examines the relevant provisions of the "Procedural Regulations for the Handling of Criminal Cases by Public Security Organs".
32. During the trial of Xu’s robbery case in a county people’s court, the county people’s procuratorate withdrew the prosecution to the county people’s court on the grounds that there was new evidence proving that Xu’s behavior did not constitute robbery. . When the court received the procuratorate's request to withdraw the prosecution, the collegial bench had already conducted a review but had not yet pronounced a verdict. How should the County People's Court handle the People's Procuratorate's request to withdraw the prosecution?
A. Make a ruling to allow the withdrawal of the prosecution
B. Make a ruling not to allow the withdrawal of the prosecution
C. The reasons for withdrawing the prosecution can be reviewed first, and then Make a ruling on whether to allow the withdrawal of prosecution
D. The reasons for withdrawing the prosecution should be examined first, and then make a ruling on whether to allow the withdrawal of the prosecution
Answer: D
Test point: Public Prosecution: Withdrawal of prosecution in the first-instance public prosecution procedure
Detailed explanation: The withdrawal of prosecution in the first-instance procedure includes the withdrawal of prosecution cases and the withdrawal of private prosecution cases. Article 177 of the former Supreme Court Interpretation stipulates: If the People's Procuratorate requests to withdraw the prosecution before pronouncing the judgment, the People's Court shall examine the reasons for the People's Procuratorate to withdraw the prosecution and make a ruling on whether to allow it. Regarding the latter situation, Article 198 of the Supreme Court Interpretation stipulates that if the private prosecutor requests to withdraw the prosecution, the People's Court shall consider that the withdrawal of the prosecution is voluntary and shall allow it; if it considers that the private prosecutor has been forced or coerced and the withdrawal of the prosecution is not voluntary, the People's Court shall not With permission. It can be seen that whether it is a private prosecution case or a public prosecution case, the court should review the withdrawal of the prosecution. It is particularly important to note that the content of the review is different: in public prosecution cases, the reasons for withdrawing the prosecution by the People's Procuratorate must be reviewed, while in private prosecution cases, the voluntariness of the withdrawal must be reviewed. Therefore option D is correct.
Comments: It is relatively simple. The issue of withdrawal of prosecution in the first instance of a public prosecution case is relatively easy. Candidates need to pay attention to the issue of withdrawal of prosecution in the second instance, which is relatively complicated
33. Liu, 17 years old, is an employee of a school for the deaf and mute. He was prosecuted by the procuratorate on suspicion of theft. Liu's defender Gao argued that Liu was not the perpetrator in this case. After review, the County People's Court decided to hear the case in accordance with ordinary procedures. Which of the following is the basis for the court's decision to hear the case according to ordinary procedures?
A. Liu is a minor
B. Liu is an employee of a school for the deaf
C. Defender Gao believes that Liu is not guilty
D. The Procuratorate does not recommend the application of simplified procedures
Answer: D: C
Test point: Situations in which simplified procedures are not applicable
Detailed explanation: According to the current legal provisions of our country. Criminal proceedings are divided into two categories: ordinary procedures (including ordinary procedures and summary trials) and summary procedures. This question is to ask why the simplified procedure is not applicable, and to examine the difference in the applicable conditions between the two procedures. "Several Opinions on the Application of Summary Procedures in the Trial of Public Prosecution Cases" clearly stipulates the circumstances under which summary procedures are applicable. Article 1 preliminarily stipulates that summary procedures may be applied to public prosecution cases that meet the following circumstances: (1) The facts are clear and the evidence is Sufficient; (2) The defendant and defender have no objection to the basic criminal facts of the charge; (3) The defendant may be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, or fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years. Fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years, criminal detention, public surveillance or a single fine. If the procuratorate does not recommend the application of summary procedures, it does not mean that the court will definitely decide to hear the case according to ordinary procedures. Article 4 of the Opinions stipulates that the People's Procuratorate does not recommend the application of summary procedures for public prosecution cases. If the People's Court deems that summary procedures can be applied after review, it shall seek the opinions of the People's Procuratorate, the defendant and the defender. After the People's Procuratorate agrees and transfers all case files and evidence materials, it will apply the simplified procedure for trial. Therefore, the court has certain discretion when applying summary procedures and does not fully act in accordance with the opinions of the procuratorate. Therefore, D is wrong. As for A and B, the law says nothing at all.
Article 2 of "Several Opinions" makes an exclusionary provision on summary procedures. Summary procedures are not applicable to public prosecution cases under the following circumstances: (1) Sexual assault cases with relatively complex circumstances; ( 2) The defendant puts forward a defense of innocence; (3) The defendant is blind, deaf or mute; (4) There are other circumstances in which it is inappropriate to apply the summary procedure trial. It is believed that Liu is not guilty, which obviously falls under the circumstances of the defendant's innocence defense stipulated in paragraph 2. Therefore, the summary procedure cannot be applied. Item C is correct.
Comments: Relatively simple. However, when applying simplified procedures or applying ordinary procedures for simplified trials, it should be noted that they are different from those of the intermediate courts with jurisdiction over the case and the compulsory designated defense by the court. These issues are easily confused. Come