Previous 6 / 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 ㈡另陳○○之同居人丁○○因陳○○去向不明，恐生意外，前於104年7月15日向臺中市政府警察局第三分局健康派出所請求協尋。嗣於104年10月5日上午11時20分許，適有從事道路標線清洗之工人徐○○，駕車搭載清洗用噴水機清洗鋼板護欄，清洗至花蓮縣○○鄉台8線公路119.2公里處路段時，因噴水機油料用罄，而在場停留等候其他作業車輛前��加油時，發覺公路下方疑有腐臭異味傳出，探頭查看見下方有綠色桶子，似有蒼蠅飛舞，遂報警處理，經花蓮縣警察局新城分局派警前往勘察，再由公路下方山坡尋獲綠色鐵桶內亦裝有1名男性屍體（綠色鐵桶業經扣案），經警報請臺灣花蓮地方檢察署檢察官督同法醫師相驗結果，確認該錄色鐵桶內屍體為失蹤人口陳○○，經警查知最後與陳○○接觸者為戊 ○○，始循線查悉上情。三、案經內政部警政署刑事警察局偵查第七大隊、臺中市政府警察局刑事警察大隊移送、臺中市政府警察局第四分局報告臺灣臺中地方檢察署檢察官相驗後主動檢舉偵查；臺灣花蓮地方檢察署檢察官相驗後呈請臺灣高等檢察署檢察長令轉臺灣臺中地方檢察署檢察官偵查起訴。理由壹、證據能力之說明一、按刑事訴訟法施行法第7之19條規定：「中華民國112年12月 1日修正通過之刑事訴訟法施行前，已繫屬於各級法院之案件，其以後之訴訟程序，除本法另有規定外，應依修正刑事訴訟法終結之。但修正刑事訴訟法施行前已依法定程序進行之訴訟程序，其效力不受影響。」是以參照該條第2項但書之規定，本諸舊程序適用舊法，新程序始用新法之一般法則，各級法院於前開關於鑑定制度之刑事訴訟法修正施行前，已依法踐行之訴訟程序（如鑑定之相關證據法則之適用），其效力不受影響： ⒈按法院或檢察官得囑託醫院、學校或其他相當之機關、團體為鑑定，或審查他人之鑑定，並準用第203條至第206條之1 第六頁

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