My Cousin Vinny 法律英语阅读

In the film, a police officer questions a college student who has been arrested for killing a grocery store clerk. The stunned(使目瞪口呆;使发愣) student, who at first thought that he had been arrested for shoplifting(入店行窃) a can of tuna(金枪鱼) fish, repeats in a dazed, questioning voice, “I shot the clerk?” In court, however, the police officer makes it sound as if the student confessed to the murder by testifying that the student asserted, “I shot the clerk.” In real life, of course, police distortion is no laughing matter.

Recording Statements Made to Police Officers

  People who want to cooperate with police officers but fear that the police will distort their statements should at least insist that the police officers tape record the conversation or prepare a written summary of it for the person to sign. The tape or summary minimizes a police officer’s opportunity to distort at a later time. But there is a potential downside(不利方面) to having the statement recorded. Once the words are on tape, a defendant will have to live with(<口>承认, 忍受(不愉快的事)) them if the case goes to trial, rather than argue that the police got it wrong.

  d. How Knowledgeable Am I About the Law Governing the Events About Which I’m Being Questioned?

  People sometimes unwittingly provide evidence of their own guilt because they inaccurately believe that their behavior does not amount to criminal conduct. They may think they are explaining their innocence, while the police officers are using their explanation to amass evidence of a crime. For example, Moe gets into a fist fight with Curly, which results in a severe cut to Curly’s head. A police officer contacts Moe, seeking his version of the fight. Thinking that he acted in self-defense, Moe fully describes his version of events. However, as the police officer interprets Moe’s story, Moe used excessive force, and the officer arrests Moe for aggravated assault(加重企图伤害罪). Had Moe more clearly understood the law, he might not have talked to the police officer.

   1、People sometimes unwittingly provide evidence of their own guilt because they inaccurately believe that their behavior does not amount to criminal conduct.(翻译)

双语阅读 Supreme Court to hear challenge to Gitmo tribunals

BREAKING NEWS ~ Supreme Court to hear challenge to Gitmo tribunals

  The US Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a challenge to the Bush administration’s use of military tribunals for foreign terror suspects. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld certiorari petition comes on appeal from the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which held in July that Guantanamo Bay  detainees may be tried by military commissions, overturning a lower court decision that military commissions were not competent to determine whether the detainee was a prisoner of war. The case involves Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who allegedly served as a driver for Osama bin Laden, and the lower court ruled that Hamdan had not been found by a competent tribunal to be or not to be a prisoner of war and that he was due the full protections of a prisoner of war under the Third Geneva Convention. The district court further held that the military commission rules were not in keeping with those for a court-martial due a POW. The appeals court ruled that because Hamdan was a member of al Qaeda, the Geneva Conventions did not apply to him and he could not assert the unlawfulness of the military commissions on that basis. Late last month, a group of 450 law professors circulated a statement urging the Court to grant certiorari in the case, saying the Court must “the relationship between the President’s constitutional powers as Commander-in-Chief and the existing constitutional, statutory, and international rules and tribunals that govern the conduct of war.” Additional case documents are available from the lead counsel for Hamdan, including the government brief opposing certiorari, and several amicus briefs. The Hamdan case was the focus of a recent online symposium in the New York University Journal of Law and Liberty. AP has more.


   美国最高法院星期一同意审理布什当局让军事法院审理外国恐怖主义嫌犯是否合法一案。汉姆丹诉拉姆斯菲尔德一案源于哥伦比亚地区巡回法院上诉法院的上诉裁定,上诉法院7月份裁定关塔那摩湾的拘留者可以由特别军事法庭审判,推翻了下级法院的判决。而下级法院的判决是特别军事法庭不能决定拘留者是否是战犯。本案涉及萨姆里·阿莫德·汉姆丹,此人声称只是奥萨姆·本·拉登的司机,因而下级法院判决特别军事法庭不能决定汉姆丹是否是战俘,他应该受到第三日内瓦公约的完全保护。地区法院进而裁决由于是战俘,特别军事法庭规则不适用。上诉法院裁定因为汉姆丹是基地组织成员,日内瓦公约对其不适用,他不能在此基础上宣称 特别军事法庭审判不合法。上月末,450位法学教授发表声明,敦促最高法院调审此案,声称鉴于总统作为军队总司令的宪法权力和现有的宪法、制定法、国际规 则及审理战俘的特别法庭的关系,最高法院有必要审理此案。其他案件相关文件可以从汉姆丹的首席律师处获得,包括政府反对移送的简要声明和几个法庭之友的简要声明。汉姆丹一案是纽约大学法律与自由学报最近在网上举办的一个研讨会的焦点。美联社对此有更多报道。

Talking to the Police 法律英语阅读



Talking to the Police 与警察谈话

  The overbearing(傲慢的, 专横的) police interrogation designed to wrench a confession from a quivering(颤抖的) suspect is an enduring dramatic image. Though the image is largely a relic of the past, police officers do question individuals in a variety of circumstances. For example, aside from seeking a confession, police officers may question an arrestee to uncover information about additional suspects, or officers may simply seek information from people they have no intention of arresting. This chapter examines common situations in which police officers are likely to ask questions, and describes the typical legal consequences both of talking and of remaining silent.

  Prosecutors can be counted on to use your words against you. Even a seemingly innocuous or innocent explanation may appear to link you to a crime when your words are recounted by a police officer, and may return to haunt you throughout your entire case, from the charges, to the amount of bail, to the trial itself. People who have even a remote suspicion that they may be accused of a crime should never talk to police officers before first talking to a lawyer.


     1、interrogation 审问,讯问,审讯
  2、confession 交代,招供,供认,认罪
  3、suspect 嫌疑犯
  4、remaining silent 保持沉默
  5、innocuous无害的,无伤大雅的, 不得罪人的
  6、innocent 清白的 ,无辜的,无罪判决的人,无罪判决者
  7、bail 保释 ,保人 ,保释金
  8、trial 审理,审判
  9、remote 间接的



Comparison of Federal and State Criminal Systems

           Most criminal prosecutions take place in state courts. The chart below highlights some of the key differences between state and federal criminal systems.

  · Jurisdiction (”power” to decide cases,管辖权). A state has power over defendants who violate the laws of that state. The federal government has power over defendants who commit criminal acts on federal property (for example, an assault in a post office) or whose criminal acts cross state lines (for example, a kidnapper transports a victim from Iowa to Missouri). A state and the federal government can have “concurrent” power over a defendant when the same criminal activity violates both state and federal laws. In those situations, state and federal prosecutors make case-by-case decisions as to whether a defendant will be prosecuted in state or federal court.

  · Police Officers(警官). Typical state police officers are county sheriffs and city police officers. Typical federal police officers are agents of the FBI and DEA (Drug Enforcement Administration).

  · Prosecutors(检察官). Federal criminal prosecutions are handled by US Attorneys, who are appointed by and are ultimately responsible to the US Attorney General. State prosecutors, many of whom are elected on a countywide basis, carry a variety of titles; common ones are district attorney, state’s attorney and city attorney.

  · Defense Attorneys(辩护律师). Most criminal defendants qualify for government-paid defense attorneys. Government-paid attorneys are usually employed either by an office of the Federal Public Defender or a county’s Public Defender office. (For information about the differences between government-paid and privately retained defense attorneys, see Chapter 7.)

  · Trial Courts(审判法院). Most federal criminal prosecutions occur in United States District Courts. State courts carry such titles as ”superior court(最高法院),” “municipal court(市法院),” “police court(治安法院)” or ”county court(县法院),” depending on the state and the seriousness of criminal charges.

  · Judges(法官). Federal trial judges are known as District Court Judges(联邦地区法院法官); they are appointed for life by the President subject to confirmation(确认、批准) by the US Senate. State court judges are typically initially appointed by governors(州长,现在我们各省的省长也用这个词了) and then are subject to election every few years. State court trial judges carry such titles as Superior Court Judge, Municipal Court Judge and (in New York) Supreme Court Judge. In both State and Federal courts, “magistrates” may preside over pretrial hearings such as bail hearings, as well as less serious criminal trials.

   · All-Purpose vs. Specialized Judges(全能法官与专门法官). Federal courts use the “all-purpose judge” system. This means that the same judge almost always presides over a case from beginning to end—that is, from a defendant’s first court appearance to final acquittal or sentencing. Some states also follow the all-purpose judge model. In many states, however, judges are specialized. For example, one judge may determine bail (see Chapter 5), another judge may hear pretrial motions (see Chapter 19) and a third judge may preside over a trial (see Chapter 21).



  1、property [英汉法学大词典] n.财产 ,财产权,物业,无形资产,我们常说的物业管理可是翻译成property management哦。

  2、kidnapper [英汉法学大词典] n.绑匪 ,绑架者,诱拐者,注意kidnap英文的意思是To seize and detain unlawfully and usually for ransom,或者这样解释The taking away of an individual against his will. The term is usually applied to instances in which ransom is demanded for the return of the kidnapped person.这里并不需要绑匪有要赎金的意思。

   3、FBI and DEA 美国联邦调查局和麻醉品管制局,关于DEA有各种译法,关键是对其职能的理解出现了偏差,WIKIPEDIA的解释为The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is a United States Department of Justice law enforcement agency tasked with suppressing the sale of recreational drugs by enforcing the Controlled Substances Act of 1970. It shares concurrent jurisdiction with the Federal Bureau of Investigation in narcotics enforcement matters.

  4、pretrial hearings [英汉法学大词典] 审前听证会

  5、US Attorneys可不是翻译成美国律师,而是US Attorney General美国总检察官任免的联邦检察官,同样district attorney, state’s attorney and city attorney中的attorney也是检察官的意思


法律制度 Legal System 法律职业 Legal Profession 法律教育 Legal Education
司法系统 Judicial System 宪法 Constitution 行政法Administrative Law
刑法 Criminal Law 民权法 Civil Rights Law 合同法 Contract Law
侵权法 Tort Law 财产法 Property Law 公司法 Corporation Law
保险法 Insurance Law 商法 Commercial Law 税法 Tax Law
环境保护法 Environmental Law 家庭法 Family Law 知识产权法 Intellectual Property Law
民事诉讼程序 Civil Procedure 刑事诉讼程序 Criminal Procedure 证据规则 Rules of Evidence

The PRC Legal System Introduction

        The PRC legal system is based on the PRC Constitution and is made up of written laws, regulations, directives and local laws, laws of Special Administrative Regions and laws resulting from international treaties entered into by the PRC government. Court case verdicts do not constitute binding precedents. However, they are used for the purposes of judicial reference and guidance.

  The National People’s Congress of the PRC (”NPC”) and the Standing Committee of the NPC are empowered by the PRC Constitution to exercise the legislative power of the State. The NPC has the power to amend the PRC Constitution and enact and amend basic laws governing State agencies and civil and criminal matters. The Standing Committee of the NPC is empowered to enact and amend all laws except for the laws that are required to be enacted and amended by the NPC.

  The State Council is the highest organ of the State administration and has the power to enact administrative rules and regulations. The ministries and commissions under the State Council are also vested with the power to issue orders, directives and regulations within the jurisdiction of their respective departments. All administrative rules, regulations, directives and orders promulgated by the State Council and its ministries and commissions must be consistent with the PRC Constitution and the national laws enacted by the NPC. In the event that a conflict arises, the Standing Committee of the NPC has the power to annul administrative rules, regulations, directives and orders.

  At the regional level, the provincial and municipal congresses and their respective standing committees may enact local rules and regulations and the people’s governments may promulgate administrative rules and directives applicable to their own administrative areas. These local laws and regulations must be consistent with the PRC Constitution, the national laws and the administrative rules and regulations promulgated by the State Council. The State Council, provincial and municipal governments may also enact or issue rules, regulations or directives in new areas of the law for experimental purposes. After gaining sufficient experience with experimental measures, the State Council may submit legislative proposals to be considered by the NPC or the Standing Committee of the NPC for enactment at the national level.

  The PRC Constitution vests the power to interpret laws in the Standing Committee of the NPC. According to the Decision of the Standing Committee of the NPC Regarding the Strengthening of Interpretation of Laws passed on June 10, 1981, the Supreme People’s Court, in addition to its power to give general interpretation on the application of laws in judicial proceedings, also has the power to interpret specific cases. The State Council and its ministries and commissions are also vested with the power to interpret rules and regulations that they have promulgated. At the regional level, the power to interpret regional laws is vested in the regional legislative and administrative bodies which promulgate such laws








The difference between criminal and civil court?

Criminal Cases

Criminal acts are those that go against the rules of the Criminal Code or against another federal statute . In Canada, a criminal act is legally seen as an offence against the state, even though there may have been a specific individual who was the victim of the crime.

In a criminal trial, there are two sides: the prosecution and the defence. The prosecution brings the case to trial. The lawyer who prosecutes is called a Crown, or Prosecuting Attorney. “Crown” refers to his or her role as representative of the state.

If there is a victim of the crime, that person will have their own legal representation. The Crown Attorney is not their lawyer. If they have a role in the trial, it will be as a witness to the crime.

The person charged with committing a criminal act is called the accused or the defendant. The accused has the right to represent him or herself, but is most often represented by a defence lawyer.

A person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is the prosecution’s job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person is guilty. If the prosecution is unable to do this, the accused is acquitted and set free. The rights of the accused person are guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

If an accused person is found guilty, they will receive a sentence, or punishment. This could range from a small fine to a long time in prison, depending on the crime. The death penalty is not practised in Canada.

Civil Cases

In a civil case, both parties are called litigants. The person who brings the issue to the courts is called a plaintiff, and the person responding is called a defendant.

Suing a person or an organization is done through civil law. Family Law and Labour Law are both examples of civil law.

If a civil claim is ruled valid, the judge will likely state how the problem can be fiexed (ie. name a rememdy) Depending on the case, the judge might tell the defendant to pay the plaintiff damages, make a public apology or stop a particular activity or action. For example, if you had filed an action against a newspaper for publishing incorrect and harmful information about you, a judge might tell the newspaper to print a correction and an apology and to pay you for the loss of reputation that you had suffered.

PRC National People's Congress

The National People’s Congress is the highest organ of State power of the People’s Republic of China. Its main functions and powers include formulation of laws, delegating authority, policy formulation, and supervision of other governing organs.

I. Legislative Power:

The NPC has the right to enact and amend the Constitution of the People ‘ s Republic of China, and to enact and amend basic laws concerning criminal offenses, civil affairs, State organs, and other matters.

II. Delegating Authority:

The power to delegate authority allows the Congress to select, empower, and remove leadership and members of the highest State organs.

The NPC has the right to select the members of the Standing Committee of the NPC; to elect the president and vice-president of the People’s Republic of China; to appoint and approve premier, vice-premiers, State councillors, minist ers in charge of ministries and commissions, auditor-general and secretary- general of the State Counci l; to elect the chairman of the Central Military Commission and decide other mem bers of the Commission; and to elect the president of the Supreme People’s Cour t and the procurator-general of the Supreme People’s Procuratorate. The NPC has the right to remove any or all members it elects and decides, and is therefore t he final authority among all State organs.

III. Policy Formulation:

The NPC has the right to examine and approve government reports; to exam ine and approve the plan for national economic and social development and report s on its implementation; to examine and approve the State budget and reports on its implementation; to approve the establishment of provinces, autonomous region s and municipalities directly under the Central Government; to decide on the establishment of special administrative regions and the systems to be instituted wi thin these regions; and to declare war and sign treaties of peace. It also exerc ises other functions and powers as the supreme State power.

IV. Supervision of Governing Organs:

The NPC has the right to supervise the implementation of the Constitution. According to the Chinese Constitution, the State Council, the Supreme People ‘ s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are all invested by the NPC, are responsible to it, and supervised by it. The NPC’s exercise of its supervisor y role is to oversee the actions of the government and other State organs on behalf of the people. This is an important guarantee for the normal and legal operation of the State apparatus.

Since 1954, the People’s Republic of China has convened eight National People’s Congresses.

Number Month/Year Chairman

1 Sept/1954 Liu Shaoqi

2 Apr/1959 Zhu De

3 Dec/1964 Zhu De

4 Jan/1975 Zhu De

5 Mar/1978 Ye Jianying

6 Jun/1983 Peng Zhen

7 Mar/1988 Wan Li

8 Mar/1993 Qiao Shi

9 Mar/1998 Li Peng

10 Mar/2003 Wu Bangguo

Under the current Constitution and related laws, the NPC holds a session on the first quarter of each year, convened by its Standing Committee. A single term of a NPC deputy is five years.

The NPC Standing Committee is the permanent supreme State organ of power and legislation. It exercises the highest State power and legislative power when the NPC is not in session. The Standing Committee is composed of 153 members, none of whom can assume an office in State administrative, judicial or procuratorial organs, so as to maintain a separation of powers and to better supervise these

The NPC Standing Committee has the right to interpret the Constitution a nd supervises its implementation; enacts and amends laws, with the exception of laws relating to fields reserved for the NPC as a whole, partially supplements and amends laws enacted by the NPC when that body is not in session, and interprets laws. Since 1979, the NPC and its Standing Committee have enacted over 300 laws, and local people’s congresses and their standing committees have drawn up m ore than 3,000 local rules and regulations.

Special committees are permanent organs representing the NPC. When the N PC is in session, the main work of these committees is to study, examine and draw up related motions. When the NPC is not in session, these committees work under the direction of the NPC Standing Committee. Currently, there are eight permanent special committees the Ethnic Groups Committee, the Legal Committee, the Finance and Economics Committee, the Education, Science, Culture and Public Heal the Committee, the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Overseas Chinese Committee, the Committee for Internal and Judicial Affairs and the Committee on Environmental and Resource Protection.


        证据规则或证据法是关于证据的可采性(admissibility)、相关性(relevancy)、价值量(weight)和充分性(sufficiency)以及证明责任(Burden of Proof)等问题的法律原则和规则的总称。美国的证据法与其他程序法一样,也带有对抗式诉讼和陪审团制度的特征。例如,证据责任属于原告和被告而不属于法官;所有证人都是为原告或被告出庭而不是法庭作证;很多证据规则都是围绕着陪审团的只能而制定的。

        按照美国的传统法律,证据有两种基本类型(types of evidence)和三种基本形式(forms of evidence)。两种基本类型是直接证据(direct evidence)和间接证据(indirect evidence)或旁证(circumstantial evidence)。三种基本形式包括言词证据(testimonial evidence)、实物证据(tangible evidence)和司法认知(judicial notice)。其中,实物证据即案件中的“展示物品”(physical exhibit),它包括实在证据(real evidence)和示意证据(demonstrative evidence)。前者指案件中“实实在在的东西”,如杀人用的枪、伪造的支票等。后者只能表明案件中某些情况的视听材料,如现场模型、图示等。司法认知是指那些无须专门证明即可由法官确认的事实,如旧金山市属于加利福尼亚的司法管辖权范围之内;7月下午7点30分在德克萨斯州的达拉斯是白天的傍晚时光;通过检验血液确定是否醉酒是一种可以采纳的科学方法等。

         在美国的证据规则中,证据的可采性处于核心的地位。确定一个证据是否可以采用,主要应考察其实质性(materiality)、证明性(probativeness)和有效性(competency)。而实质性和证明性合在一起即构成了相关性。由于美国律师们在就对方证据提出反对时经常使用无相关性(irrelevant)、无实质性(immaterial)、无有效性(incompetent)这三个概念,所以有人把证据的可采性规则概况为“三无”规则(”three I’s”)

        美国的证据法主要存在于大量的法院判例之中。1975年通过的“联邦证据规则”主要适用于各级联邦法院。虽然统一各州法律全国代表大会早在1953年就推出了“统一证据规则”(Uniform Rules of Evidence),但是各州的证据法仍有很多差异。美国证据法的另一个特点是其刑事案件中的证据规则与民事案件中的证据规则基本相同。

        虽然美国的证据法在证据可采性等问题上有具体明确的规定,但是在证据价值的评断喝运用证据证明案件事实的问题上却赋予法官和陪审员极大的自由裁量权。因此,其证明制度也应属于“自由证明”(Free Proof)的范畴,而不应属于“规制证明”或“法定证明”(Regulated Proof)的范畴。


法律制度 Legal System 法律职业 Legal Profession 法律教育 Legal Education
司法系统 Judicial System 宪法 Constitution 行政法Administrative Law
刑法 Criminal Law 民权法 Civil Rights Law 合同法 Contract Law
侵权法 Tort Law 财产法 Property Law 公司法 Corporation Law
保险法 Insurance Law 商法 Commercial Law 税法 Tax Law
环境保护法 Environmental Law 家庭法 Family Law 知识产权法 Intellectual Property Law
民事诉讼程序 Civil Procedure 刑事诉讼程序 Criminal Procedure 证据规则 Rules of Evidence


        英美法系国家的抗辩式诉讼制度(the adversary procedure)是在控告式诉讼制度(the accusatorial procedure)的基础上产生和发展起来的。与之相对应的是大陆法系国家采用的纠问式或审问士诉讼制度(the inquisitorial procedure).前者的基本原则之一是“不告不理”(No accusation, no trial.)。不过,英国的传统是“私诉”(private prosecution),即由公民(包括警察)以个人名义提起刑事诉讼;而美国则在殖民地时期就建立了“公诉”(public prosecution)制度,即由检察官代表政府或人民提起刑事诉讼。

         毫无疑问,对抗制或抗辩制也是美国刑事诉讼程序的最主要特点,而且它往往具有较民事诉讼更为重要的意义。此外,美国的刑事诉讼规则中很强调对被告人权利的保护,因此有许许多多“程序保障”(procedural safeguards)。不过,美国的刑事诉讼制度对被告人的保护“太多了”,以至于在某些情况下不得不牺牲社会安全和公众利益。刑事司法系统不能有效地打击犯罪活动,这显然是美国社会中犯罪问题严重的原因之一。有些美国学者批评美国的刑事司法系统(criminal justice system)是“不公正的无系统”(“no-justice non-system”,在英语中,”justice”一次既可以表示“司法”也可以表示“公正”)。

         美国的刑事诉讼法律在很大程度上受其宪法的影响。例如,美国宪法的第四、第五、第六等修正案都直接与刑事诉讼有关。因此,美国一些法学院教授刑事诉讼法的课程就称为“宪法刑事诉讼”(Constitutional Criminal Procedure)。美国各州都有自己的刑事诉讼法典。最高法院于1946年颁布的“联邦刑事诉讼规则”(Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure)对各州的影响要比其民事诉讼规格的影响小得多。


法律制度 Legal System 法律职业 Legal Profession 法律教育 Legal Education
司法系统 Judicial System 宪法 Constitution 行政法Administrative Law
刑法 Criminal Law 民权法 Civil Rights Law 合同法 Contract Law
侵权法 Tort Law 财产法 Property Law 公司法 Corporation Law
保险法 Insurance Law 商法 Commercial Law 税法 Tax Law
环境保护法 Environmental Law 家庭法 Family Law 知识产权法 Intellectual Property Law
民事诉讼程序 Civil Procedure 刑事诉讼程序 Criminal Procedure 证据规则 Rules of Evidence


         美国的民事诉讼具有两个显著的特点:其一是对抗制或抗辩制(adversary system);其二是陪审制(jury system)。所谓对抗制,就是说诉讼活动以双方当事人(通过其律师)的“竞争”为主要内容。当事人提起诉讼;当事人提出证据;当事人进行证明。而法官只能作为仲裁人,不能进行独立的调查。有人曾把对抗诉讼比喻为一场球赛 – 双发律师及其当事人和证人为参赛球员;法官是裁判;双方“队员”竭力在激烈对抗的比赛中取胜;而法官则保证比赛按规则进行并确定和宣布比赛结果。在比赛中,法官应该保持公正,但是在实践中法官偏向某一方“队员”的情况亦菲罕见。


         长期以来,美国各州的民事诉讼法律之间一直存在着很大的差异。1934年,美国国会授权最高法院制定民事程序规则。1938年,最高法院公布了“联邦民事诉讼规则”(Federal Rules of Civil Procedure)。此后,该规则不断被修改。诚然,民事诉讼规则在美国还远远没有得到统一。


法律制度 Legal System 法律职业 Legal Profession 法律教育 Legal Education
司法系统 Judicial System 宪法 Constitution 行政法Administrative Law
刑法 Criminal Law 民权法 Civil Rights Law 合同法 Contract Law
侵权法 Tort Law 财产法 Property Law 公司法 Corporation Law
保险法 Insurance Law 商法 Commercial Law 税法 Tax Law
环境保护法 Environmental Law 家庭法 Family Law 知识产权法 Intellectual Property Law
民事诉讼程序 Civil Procedure 刑事诉讼程序 Criminal Procedure 证据规则 Rules of Evidence