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.

Study on the Sociological Model of Conviction and Sentencing

Legal Realism and Criminal Justice in Transitional Society

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

Study on the Theory of Constitutive Conditions about Circumstances for Sentencing

On the Independence of Sentencing Process

Judicial Review of the Balance Between Crime and Punishment

Interaction of Sentencing and Conviction:Charges Changed for Fair Sentencing

On the Method of Defining the Criterion of Sentencing

Sentencing goals, causal attributions, ideology, and personality.

A Corpus-Based Interpretation of the Discourse–cognitive–society Triangle on Chinese Court Judgments

Criminal Methodology and Judicial Logic

A Discussion on Criminal Judges' Interpretation of Criminal Law

Sentencing Recommendations, Anchoring Effect and Fairness in Criminal Justice—An Empirical Study Based on a Sample of 520 Sentences in K City

Models of Sentencing Procedural Reform

Sentencing Disparity and Sentencing Guidelines: the Case of China

Gauging Court Adjudication: Qualification And Quantification

Sex Disparities in Sentencing and Judges’ Beliefs: A Vignette Approach

Sentencing Disparities in Corruption Cases in China

Attribution and Judicial Control in Chinese Court Judgments: a Corpus-Based Study

A Study of "Judge-Defendant Bargain" in Criminal Proceedings

Mean of Declaratory Sentence of Crime without Statutory Sentencing Factors and Its Significance