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.

Reflections upon Packer's Crime Control Model and Due Process Model

On the Basic Philosophy of Criminal Reconciliation——Comparative Study between Zhejiang "Fengqiao Experience" and U.S. VOR Model

Choice of Value: Counter- Terrorism Measures and Criminal Procedure——Retrospect and Analysis of the American Counter- Terrorism Law

The rebutment on crime system in Germany and Japan

Several Choices in the Re - revising of Criminal Procedural Law

Theory of Criminal Constitutive Elements:Relationship Confusion and Conquer

Caution on Excessive Pursuit of the Efficiency of Criminal Procedure

The Protection of the Defendant’s Rights in Criminal Trial by Default — From the Perspective of Due Process

Rethinking the Procedural Sanction Theory:Focusing on the Exclusionary Rule

Some Thoughts about the Reform of Criminal Justice System

Current System of Constitution of Crime Does Not Have to Be Restructured

To Provide for New Rights or To Strengthen Remedies?

The Reconsideration of Investigation and Interrogation Coalition

The Framework of Doctrines of Criminalization Based on Violation and Culpability

Being Cautious to the Traps Set Up by the Model of Indictment——Only Doctrine of the Public Prosecution——Reviewing on in the Criminal Proceeding of Japan

Retrospection and Reflection on the Criminal Judicial Reform in Recent Years

A Framework Theory of Punishment

Models of Sentencing Procedural Reform

Problems with the Theory of Anti-Value Acts: Including A Discussion with Professor Zhou Guangquan

On Balance Between Criminal Police Power and Civil Rights after the Adoption of Remodification of Criminal Procedure Law

On relationship between Prosecutors and Police: How to Improve the Monitoring and Controling System on China′s Indictment-investigation