Abstract:The primary subject of the sentencing procedural reform is to establish an appropriate sentencing procedural model to coordinate the relationship between conviction and sentencing proceedings reasonably. Although the newly established reform program by the Supreme People's Court can be feasibly implemented in the guilty plea cases, it would meet some difficulties in both summary cases and general procedures and even face some theoretical disputes and real risks. Through the experimental exploration of the grassroots courts, a model named "centralized sentencing model", basing on the mass—appearance of prosecutors, has gradually taken shape in summary proceedings. In this model, after the indictment which confirms the defendant has constituted a crime, the court hears a number of cases prosecuted by prosecutors in a continuous sentencing hearing and gives their sentencing decisions respectively. In cases where the defendant pleas not guilty, the viewpoints for the establishment of an "independent sentencing procedure" are came out and supported by some law experts and the judiciary. This model means that the court trial shall be divided into two relatively independent stages, that is, conviction and the sentencing hearing. The court should firstly settle down whether the accused has constituted a crime or not through investigation and court debates. After the declaration of conviction, the court will organize a special sentencing proceeding. By listening to the views of both defense lawyers and prosecutors and reviewing the statutory and discretionary sentencing circumstances, the court then makes the final decisions on the sentencing issue of the accused. In cases where the defendant voluntarily pleas guilty, the "flexible alternating sentencing model" still leaves some spaces for further improvement. So the sentencing procedural reform is far from maturity. The policy—makers of the reform should not be complacent and conservative. For these self—engendered reform experiences, the reformers should not blindly adopt the attitude of rejection, but instead should face up to the reasonableness of their existence and assess their effectiveness, so as to make them play a greater role in the formation of a new system.

From Technique to System:On the Innovation of Sentencing Procedure

Public Cases, Authentication Opinions, and Amendments to Law of Criminal Procedure

From Special Mitigation to Unconstitutional Censorship: Taking Xu Ting Case as an Example

Current status, obstacles and advice for improvement on expert assistant system

Continuation of Systemic Failures: from Cui Ning to Contemporary Wrongful Conviction Cases in China

On the Investigation of Sentencing Information

On the Independence of Sentencing Process

Discussion on the System of Sentencing Proposal

Transforming the Evaluation of the Rule of Law in China

Models of Sentencing Procedural Reform

Judicial Review of the Balance Between Crime and Punishment

Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms and Sentencing in Chinese Criminal Justice: Problems and Solutions

On Establishing Seprarate Process of Sentence in China

Community Correction,its Current Situation,and How to Approach It in China

On Discretionary Mechanism of Penalty for Minor Offenders

Criminal Policy Research on Juvenile Delinquency from the Perspective of Social Management Innovation

Implementation and Contruction of Pretrial Conference System——A perspective of pretrial conferences' practice in Beijing and Shanghai

Organizational Innovation,Power Recombination and "Letter and Visit" Institution Reform in the Transition Period

Interaction of Sentencing and Conviction:Charges Changed for Fair Sentencing

An Empirical Study on Operation of Chinese Criminal Procedure Law

Review and Reflection on the Research of Criminal Procedure