Wang Lunye, a "drug dealer" born in March of 1940, was sentenced to death in 20 13, and the death penalty was upheld in the second trial in 20 14, at the age of 74. Recently, the reporter learned from his defense lawyer that the Supreme People's Court directly sentenced him to life imprisonment because he was 75 years old at the stage of death penalty review.
According to Article 49 of China's Criminal Law, the death penalty is not applicable to people who have reached the age of 75 at the time of trial, except those who cause death by particularly cruel means.
At present, there is no clear legal provision on whether the special procedure "death penalty review" in the criminal procedure law is "at trial". This case is the first case of "75-year-old death penalty review" after the "75-year-old" clause was added in the Eighth Amendment to the Criminal Law. Xie Tongxiang, his defense lawyer, told reporters that this is also the first case in which the Supreme People's Court's death penalty review was changed to life imprisonment. Experts believe that the revision of the Supreme Law has an important precedent effect.
70-year-old man sentenced to death for drug trafficking
Wang Lunye's death penalty review case belongs to a serious transnational drug case, supervised by the Ministry of Public Security, and the action code is "Water Snake". This case was characterized as a serious transnational smuggling and drug trafficking case. China and Viet Nam are both involved. At the beginning of case investigation, public security investigators tracked audio and video recordings to collect evidence.
Wang Lunye is called an "old ghost" in the drug trafficking circle. According to the verdict, Wang Lunye was born in Vietnam. According to media reports, he returned to China in his thirties and lived in dongxing city, Guangxi on the Sino-Vietnamese border after retirement. After returning to China, Wang Lunye applied for an ID card and a household registration book. On the two most important identity documents, Wang Lunye's date of birth is1March 3, 940. According to the court verdict, "Wang Lunye and his accomplices committed the crime of drug smuggling. Wang Lunye was responsible for smuggling drugs from Vietnam and selling them to Chen Qinghua, and hired Vietnamese A Cheng to bring drugs from Vietnam to the border of Beilun River, China and Myanmar. He was directly responsible for contacting Zhong Rigui to get drugs at the designated place."
2065438+At the beginning of 2002, Wang Lunye bought 4 kilograms of heroin and prepared to sell it to drug dealer Chen Huaqing. At the trading place agreed by both parties, the police arrested these people in one fell swoop and seized more than 4 kilograms of heroin on the spot.
The reporter learned that Wang Lunye was 72 years old when he was arrested. At that time, he and Chen Huaqing were both designated as the principal offenders of the case. On May 28th, 20 13, the Intermediate People's Court of Fangchenggang City, Guangxi made a first-instance judgment on this case. Chen Huaqing and Wang Lunye were sentenced to death, and several others were sentenced to suspended death and life imprisonment. After the verdict was pronounced, Wang Lunye and others appealed. 2065438+June 2004, the court upheld the original judgment in the second instance and submitted it to the Supreme Court for approval according to law.
Whether the death penalty review is "in trial" is controversial.
By March 20 15, the case was still in the stage of death penalty review. At that time, Wang Lun was 75 years old. Whether this belongs to the "trial time" in criminal law has aroused widespread public concern.
Xie Tongxiang, the defense lawyer of Wang Lunye's death penalty review stage, told the reporter that he and another defender Xie Xiuzhi had visited the criminal trial court of the Supreme Court for many times to communicate with the collegiate bench judge in charge of the case, and submitted a written defense opinion not approving Wang Lunye's death penalty, and also applied to the death penalty review procuratorate of the Supreme Procuratorate for supervision of the case. Finally, the Supreme Court reviewed the opinions of the Supreme Procuratorate and decided to adopt the opinions put forward by the defense lawyers after discussion.
Recently, the Supreme Court ruled on this case. According to the verdict, the court held that the defendant Wang Lunye conspired to smuggle and sell heroin for illegal benefits, and his behavior constituted the crime of smuggling and selling drugs. Wang Lunye instructed others to smuggle drugs into the country from abroad. Smuggling and selling drugs are large in quantity, with serious criminal circumstances and great social harm. He is the most heinous principal in smuggling crimes and should be punished according to law. The facts ascertained in the judgment and ruling of first instance are clear, the evidence is true and sufficient, and the conviction is accurate. The trial procedure is legal. In view of the fact that Wang Lunye was 75 years old at the time of trial, the death penalty was not applicable to him according to law. In the revocation of the judgment, the defendant Wang Lunye was sentenced to death for smuggling and drug trafficking, deprived of his political rights for life, and confiscated all his personal property. Defendant Wang Lunye was convicted of smuggling and drug trafficking, sentenced to life imprisonment, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated all personal property.
Xie Tongxiang and Xie Xiuzhi said that Wang Lunye's death penalty review case was the first death penalty review case in China in 75 years. There is no precedent to follow before, and it will be used as a criminal guidance case and a criminal trial reference case in the future. Similar cases should refer to this case.
Previously, the nature of the death penalty review was debated endlessly in the legal circle, and some viewpoints, such as the theory of administrative examination and approval, held that the death penalty review stage did not belong to the "trial time". Jia Yu, president of northwest university of politics and law, disagreed with the theory of "administrative examination and approval". He believes that the trial depends on what case, and "review" is a legal and necessary procedure in cases where the defendant is sentenced to death. If the death penalty review is not over, the judgment will not actually take effect, so the review stage should be "at the time of trial". The entry into force of this case will have a precedent effect on similar cases in the future.