Previous 21 / 95 Next

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 察署檢驗報告書（相驗卷二第28至33頁）、臺灣花蓮地方檢察署104年10月5日解剖筆錄（相驗卷二第36頁）、臺灣花蓮地方檢察署相驗屍體證明書（相驗卷二第37頁）、內政部警政署刑事警察局104年10月13日刑紋字第1040095550號鑑定書（見相驗卷二第197至200頁）可憑，並有合歡派出所處理 104年10月4日發現臺8線119.2公里無名屍案相片6張（相驗卷二第12至13頁）、無名屍在殯儀館現場勘察照片15張（相驗卷二第14至17反面、第73之3至73之6反面）、花蓮縣警察局新城分局104年10月13日新警刑字第1040014333號函檢送陳○○死亡相驗解剖相片共84張（相驗卷二第171至185頁反面）、陳○○死亡��扣押照片13張（相驗卷二第190至196 頁）、裝盛陳○○之鐵桶照片6張（相驗卷二第203至204 頁）可參。 ②又經檢察官囑託法務部法醫研究所進行解剖結果，認係⒈腐敗男性遺體。⒉體表及顱腔，胸腹腔內均無外傷。⒊未發現致死性器官病變。⒋非自然狀態下死亡，屍體遭刻意遺棄掩藏等情。法務部法醫研究所復就死因進行鑑定，被害人陳○ ○經毒物化學檢驗結果，體內（送驗胸腔液、液化脾臟內）有安眠藥Zolpidem成分；遺體已高度腐敗，但因陳屍在厭氧狀態的密閉鐵桶內，延遲屍體腐敗過程，推估死亡時間在一個月以上，解剖結果排除死者因器官病變自然死亡，亦未發現體表外傷或體腔內出血，致死原因疑為窒息死亡。死者疑似在安眠藥作用下失去反抗能力，再遭以輕手法加害窒息，或直接置入密閉缺氧桶內造成窒息，死亡原因：窒息；呼吸道外部阻塞，或缺氧環境；安眠藥迷昏後預謀殺害，死亡方式為他殺等情，有法務部法醫研究所醫剖字第104110 3984號解剖報告書、鑑定報告書可憑（見相驗卷三第13至15 頁、第19至20頁反面）。 ③關於被害人陳○○之死因究竟為先遭輕手法加害窒息死亡後置入鐵桶，或遭置入鐵桶內致缺氧窒息死亡，其所謂之「輕手法」可能行為為何，及被害人死亡前是否因Zopidem藥物第二十一頁

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Yang Hongru (楊鴻儒)

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

Taiwan

Nationalities

Taiwanese

Case Title: Yang Hong-ru (Taiwan Supreme Court Criminal Judgment No. 1276 [114])

Age at Offence: 68

Age Group at Offence: Senior (60 and Above)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Unknown

Vulnerable/ Marginalised Group

Person with Disabilities: Mental

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: 23.6978

Longitude: 120.9605

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): Taiwan

Contributing TRP Partner

Taiwan Alliance to End the Death Penalty (Taiwan)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Commuted

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2010s: 2016

Method of Execution: Not executed

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Excessive and disproportionate punishment

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Murder: Multiple Victims

Expert Evidence

Forensic/Medical evidence: Autopsy/Post mortem
Forensic/Medical evidence: Blood pattern analysis
Forensic/Medical evidence: Chemistry/Toxicology/Drug analysis
Forensic/Medical evidence: Fingerprint/palmprint/footprint
Mitigation Specialist
Mental Health: Other
Mental Health: Psychiatrist
Mental Health: Psychologist

Case Background (300 words max): Yang Hong-ru was known to both victims, Chen and Lai. He may have harboured murderous intent towards the two men, possibly due to gambling debts or other motives.

Under the pretence of going on a trip or visiting friends, Yang drove away with the victim Chen on the morning of 27 June 2015, and with the victim Lai on the morning of 12 July that same year. On both occasions, during the journey, Yang laced the victims' food and drink with sleeping pills, rendering each of them unconscious. He then placed them head-first, feet-up, into sealed metal drums, where they suffocated to death within the confined spaces.

He transported the drums containing the victims' bodies to a location near the boundary between Nantou and Hualien on Provincial Highway No. 8—the first on the afternoon of 27 June 2015, and the second at midday on 12 July, where he disposed of them by pushing them into a ravine, thereby killing Chen and Lai in succession.

In the first, second, and third trials, as well as the first retrial, the defendant was sentenced to death. This was later commuted to life imprisonment in the second retrial, and that sentence was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court.

In addition to the psychiatric assessment, a pre-sentencing social investigation was also conducted in this case. A multidisciplinary team was assembled for this purpose, comprising not only psychiatrists and psychologists, but also legal scholars and criminologists.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.)

This case falls under the provisions of the Fair and Speedy Criminal Trials Act, and accordingly, the sentence ought to be reduced to life imprisonment.
Pursuant to Taiwan's parole regulations, given that the defendant is of advanced age, life imprisonment would be sufficient, as the likelihood of the defendant reoffending upon release from prison is considered low.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max)

This case has been pending before the first-instance trial since December 2015. By the time the Supreme Court remanded it for retrial in September 2023, approximately seven years and nine months had elapsed. According to the terms of the remand order, certain matters remained to be subjected to forensic examination and witnesses to be questioned, requiring further investigation and clarification. Upon completion of the court's investigation and pronouncement of the judgment in the second retrial appeal, more than eight years would have passed. Accordingly, there exist grounds under Article 7 of the Fair and Speedy Criminal Trials warranting mitigation of punishment (where a death sentence is mitigated, the punishment shall be life imprisonment).
Consideration should be given to whether, even in the event that an elderly prisoner may become eligible for parole release following prolonged execution of sentence, the risk of reoffending diminishes due to advanced age.

Legal Representation Received

Second Appeal: Private
Remand: Private
Forth Appeal: Private
Trial: State Legal Aid
Appeal: State Legal Aid
Pre-trial: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s): Article 271(1) of the Criminal Code: A person who takes the life of another shall be sentenced to death or life imprisonment or imprisonment for not less than ten years.

Case Brief Entry Status: Complete

Language of Case Materials

Mandarin (Traditional)

Is the case brief featured?: Yes

Primary Documents

【楊鴻儒】最高法院114年度台上字第1276號刑事判決.pdf
Other
Download View
【楊鴻儒】臺灣高等法院臺中分院112年度上重更二字第4號刑事判決.pdf
Other
Download View

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

Select target paragraph3

Yang Hongru (楊鴻儒)

Primary Documents

Notifications