The Implementation Rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure Article 7-8

This English translation was last updated on 2020-01-15, but the Chinese text was amended on 2023-12-15. Later amendments may not be reflected in the translation — please refer to the Chinese text.

Prior to the implementation of the amended and approved Code of Criminal Procedure on January 23, 2015, a case was filed for a retrial, pursuant to the provisions of Article 420 Paragraph 1 Subparagraph 6 of pre-amended Code of Criminal Procedure, based on new facts or new evidence that were not covered by the said provisions, and then the case was later withdrawn by the applicant pursuant to the provisions of Article 431 Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, or the case was rejected by the court pursuant to Article 434 Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, specifically because that new evidence was not covered by trial court and was not found prior to the delivery of judgment, and thus was not investigated in time for consideration. After the implementation of the said Code, the said case is filed for a retrial based on the same facts and evidence, which are now in conformance with the amended provisions, the provisions of Article 431 Paragraph 2, Article 434 Paragraph 2 of the code of criminal procedure do not apply.The scenario as described in the preceding paragraph, where the applicant withdrew the case pursuant to the provisions of Article 431 Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, or where the case was rejected by the court pursuant to Article 434 Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the provisions of Article 431 Paragraph 2 and Article 434 Paragraph 2 still apply.
中文原文 刑事訴訟法施行法第7-8條
中華民國一百零四年一月二十三日修正通過之刑事訴訟法施行前,以不屬於修正前刑事訴訟法第四百二十條第一項第六款之新事實、新證據,依該規定聲請再審,經聲請人依刑事訴訟法第四百三十一條第一項撤回,或經法院專以非屬事實審法院於判決前因未發現而不及調查斟酌之新證據為由,依刑事訴訟法第四百三十四條第一項裁定駁回,於施行後復以同一事實、證據聲請再審,而該事實、證據符合修正後規定者,不適用刑事訴訟法第四百三十一條第二項、第四百三十四條第二項規定。
前項情形,經聲請人依刑事訴訟法第四百三十一條第一項撤回,或經法院依刑事訴訟法第四百三十四條第一項裁定駁回後,仍適用刑事訴訟法第四百三十一條第二項、第四百三十四條第二項規定。

English translation for reference only; the Chinese text prevails. Not legal advice.