| Project/Area Number |
26780040
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Research Field |
Criminal law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | The University of Tokyo |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
Naruse Go 東京大学, 大学院法学政治学研究科(法学部), 准教授 (90466730)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2014-04-01 – 2017-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2016)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,120,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,400,000、Indirect Cost: ¥720,000)
Fiscal Year 2016: ¥910,000 (Direct Cost: ¥700,000、Indirect Cost: ¥210,000)
Fiscal Year 2015: ¥1,170,000 (Direct Cost: ¥900,000、Indirect Cost: ¥270,000)
Fiscal Year 2014: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 悪性格立証 / 類似事実による立証 / 刑事証拠法 / 裁判員制度 / 余罪と量刑 / 被害者の性的経歴 / 悪性格証拠 / 英米証拠法 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
The goals of this research project is to elucidate the admissibility standards of bad character and similar fact evidence, to propose the procedure in which judge decide the admissibility and to suggest how to examine these evidences which are only for sentencing at trial. I examined the various attitudes toward these evidences in the common law countries (US, England, Canada, and Australia) and the civil law country (Germany).
The conclusions are as follows. These evidences should be allowed when probative value outweigh prejudice and misleading effect, whether these evidences are used for substantive purpose or for impeachment. In pretrial arrangement hearing, judge should decide the admissibility after prosecutor and defense lawyer discuss how the material fact can be inferred from these evidences based on rule of thumb. Judge have to distinguish the procedure for guilty and that for sentencing so that fact-finder will not misuse these evidences which are only for sentencing.
|
