论文部分内容阅读
一、问题的提出:法院应该如何对待公诉案件撤诉?2005年4月,福州铁路运输法院依法受理福州铁路运输检察院指控被告人李某等四人盗窃一案。在起诉书中,公诉机关认定,被告人李某于2004年8月6日和13日,伙同同伙采用“搭人梯”拎包的方式,分别从旅客列车上盗得人民币及其他财物420元和637元。在案件审理过程中,公诉机关以不应当追究被告人李某的刑事责任为由,要求撤回对被告人的起诉。一审法院经过审查后,作出准许撤诉的刑事裁定。被告人李某不服,以自己的行为构成犯罪为由向南昌铁路运输中级法院提出上诉。2005年6月,南昌铁路运输中级法院依法驳回起诉,维持原裁定。在本案中,公诉机关在理解和适用最高人民法院《关于
First, the question raised: How should the court treat the withdrawal of prosecution cases? April 2005, Fuzhou Railway Transport Court accepted the Fuzhou Railway Transport Procuratorate accused the defendant Lee and other four theft case. In the indictment, the Public Prosecution Service determined that the defendant, Li Mou, stole RMB and other property 420 from passenger trains on August 6 and 13, 2004, in the same manner as “take the ladders” Yuan and 637 yuan. In the course of hearing the case, the Public Prosecution Service requested that the prosecution of the defendant be withdrawn on the grounds that it should not pursue the criminal liability of the defendant, Li. After examination, the court of first instance made a criminal decision allowing the withdrawal of the suit. The defendant Lee refused to accept his appeal to Nanchang Railway Intermediary Court on the ground that his conduct constituted a crime. In June 2005, Nanchang Railway Intermediate Court dismissed the prosecution according to law and upheld the original ruling. In this case, the Public Prosecution Service is understanding and applying the Supreme Court