问题 多项选择题

何某,男,20岁,工人。2007年12月1日,因与队长范某发生口角,将范某打成重伤。此案经公安机关侦查终结后,于2008年1月3日向人民检察院移送审查起诉。1月8日检察:院通知何某可以委托辩护人,并通知范某可以委托诉讼代理人参加诉讼。何某提出委托其兄为其辩护。因何某之兄曾经有过前科劣迹,所以检察院没有同意,让何某另行委托辩护人。就本案有下列四种说法,哪些选项是正确的

A.检察院超过法定期限通知何某和范某委托辩护人和诉讼代理人,违反法律规定

B.检察院通知范某可以委托诉讼代理人的期限没有违反法律规定

C.检察院应当同意何某之兄为何某辩护

D.检察院不同意何某之兄为何某辩护符合法律规定

答案

参考答案:A,C

解析:[考点] 委托辩护人
根据《刑事诉讼法》第33条:“公诉案件自案件移送审查起诉之日起,犯罪嫌疑人有权委托辩护人。自诉案件的被告人有权随时委托辩护人。人民检察院自收到移送审查起诉的案件材料之日起三日以内,应当告知犯罪嫌疑人有权委托辩护人。人民法院自受理自诉案件之日起三日以内,应当告知被告人有权委托辩护人。”依此,检察院应在收到移送审查起诉的案件材料之日起3日内通知。故A项正确,B项错误。
根据《刑事诉讼法》第32条:“犯罪嫌疑人、被告人除自己行使辩护权以外,还可以委托一至二人作为辩护人。下列的人可以被委托为辩护人:(一)律师;(二)人民团体或者犯罪嫌疑人、被告人所在单位推荐的人;(三)犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的监护人、亲友。正在被执行刑罚或者依法被剥夺、限制人身自由的人,不得担任辩护人。”根据《刑诉解释》第33条规定:“人民法院审判案件过程中,应当充分保证被告人行使刑事诉讼法第三十二条规定的辩护权利。但下列人员不得被委托担任辩护人:(一)被宣告缓刑和刑罚尚未执行完毕的人;(二)依法被剥夺、限制人身自由的人;(三)无行为能力或者限制行为能力的人;(四)人民法院、人民检察院、公安机关、国家安全机关、监狱的现职人员;(五)本院的人民陪审员;(六)与本案审理结果有利害关系的人;(七)外国人或者无国籍人。前款第(四)、(五)、(六)、(七)项规定的人员,如果是被告人的近亲属或者监护人,由被告人委托担任辩护人的,人民法院可以准许。”本题中,何某之兄曾经有过前科劣迹,并不是不能充当辩护人的法定情形。故C项正确,D项错误。

单项选择题 A1/A2型题
单项选择题

Bernard Bailyn has recently reinterpreted the early history of the United States by applying new social research findings on the experiences of European migrants. In his reinterpretation, migration becomes the organizing principle for rewriting the history of pre-industrial North America. His approach rests on four separate propositions.

The first of these asserts that residents of early modern England moved regularly about their countryside.- migrating to the New World was simply a "natural spillover". Although at first the colonies held little positive attraction for the English they would rather have stayed home--by the eighteenth century people increasingly migrated to America because they regarded it as the land of opportunity. Secondly, Bailyn holds that, contrary to the notion that used to flourish in American history textbooks, there was never a typical New World community. For example, the economic and demographic character of early New England towns varied considerably.

Bailyn’s third proposition suggests two general patterns prevailing among the many thousands of migrants: one group came as indentured servants, another came to acquire land. Surprisingly, Bailyn suggests that those who recruited indentured servants were driving forces of transatlantic migration, These colonial entrepreneurs helped determine the social character of people who came to pre-industrial North America. At first, thousands of unskilled laborers were recruited: by the 1730’s, however, American employers demanded skilled workers.

Finally, Bailyn argues that the colonies were a half-civilized hinterland of the European culture system. He is undoubtedly correct to insist that the colonies were part of the Anglo-American empire. But to divide the empire into English core and colonial periphery, as Bailyn does, devalues the achievements of colonial culture. It is true, as Bailyn claims, that high culture in the colonies never matched that in England. But what of seventeenth-century New England, where the settlers created effective laws, built a distinguished university, and published books Bailyn might respond that New England was exceptional. However, the ideas and institutions developed by New England Puritans had powerful effects on North American culture.

Although Bailyn goes on to apply his approach to some thousands of indentured servants who migrated just prior to the revolution, he fails to link their experience with the political development of the United States. Evidence presented in his work suggests how we might make such a connection. These indentured servants were treated as slaves for the period during which they had sold their time to American employers. It is not surprising that as soon as they served their time they gave up good wages in the cities and headed west to ensure their personal independence by acquiring land. Thus, it is in the west that a peculiarly American political culture began, among colonists who were suspicious of authority and intensely anti-aristocratic.

The author is primarily concerned with()

A. comparing several current interpretations of early American history

B. providing the theoretical framework that is used by most historians in understanding early American history

C. refuting an argument about early American history that has been proposed by social historians

D. discussing a reinterpretation of early American history that is based on new social research on migration