查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 施用毒品罪之緩起訴
- 緩起訴在施用毒品案件運用上之實務爭議
- 我國緩起訴制度之研究--以施用毒品罪為中心
- 毒品危害防制條例所定「3年後再犯」規定適用觀察勒戒之爭議--評最高法院109年度臺上大字第3826號裁定
- 緩起訴處分戒癮治療之回顧與展望
- 觀護人執行緩起訴案件實務運作與檢討
- 論毒品條例第24條第2項之「應依法追訴」--評最高法院100年臺非字第51號判決暨100年度第一次刑事庭會議決議
- 從海洛因施用者觀點探討緩起訴替代療法成敗之影響因素
- 臺灣施用毒品「戒癮治療」與「觀察勒戒」雙軌制:先期擇一及再犯接軌治療模式
- 再犯認定、處遇等同性與機關分工--從大法庭裁定觀察毒品施用者處遇的法理發展與運作情形
頁籤選單縮合
| 題 名 | 施用毒品罪之緩起訴 |
|---|---|
| 作 者 | 李維宗; | 書刊名 | 軍法專刊 |
| 卷 期 | 56:5 2010.10[民99.10] |
| 頁 次 | 頁90-104 |
| 分類號 | 585.38 |
| 關鍵詞 | 施用毒品罪; 緩起訴; 戒癮治療; 美沙冬替代療法; 觀察勒戒; Drug use offence; Deferred prosecution; Drug abstention and treatment; Methadone maintenance treatment; MMT; Observation and abstention; |
| 語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
| 中文摘要 | 本文從施用毒品罪,尤其是「戒癮」處遇之立法觀察分析,其規定在「毒品危 害防制條例」第20、23條與第24條之「附命完成戒癮治療之緩起訴」,特別是第 24 條在立法當時就已有許多爭議,立法以後,以美沙冬替代療法「治療」第一級 施用毒品者,助其戒癮,至於成效如何?尚待觀察。立法之主要的問題在於如何戒 癮(觀察、勒戒加上強制戒治;替代療法)始為有效?再者,本文探討修正毒品危 害防制條例第24 條,所帶來的實務爭議(主要是撤銷緩起訴後的問題),俾供實 務參考。 |
| 英文摘要 | This paper primarily investigated deferred prosecution of drug use offence based on Articles 20, 23, and 24 of "Statute for Narcotics Hazard Control" regarding regulations of deferred prosecution for demanded/compulsory drug abstention and treatment, particularly observing and analyzing how drug abstention was dealt with. Article 24 especially had led to many controversial arguments when stipulated. After it was passed, methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) substituted treatment for the first-phase drug users, helping them abstain from drug use. Its effectiveness is still under observation and evaluation. Its major legislative problems are derived from how to effectively abstain from drug (observation, abstention compulsory abstention; substitute treatment). This paper also explored practice disputes (mainly coming after deferred prosecution) resulting from revised Article 24 of Statute for Narcotics Hazard Control and hopes to provide practice references. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。