Siōng-sòo (ing-gú: appeal) Teh huat-lu̍t siōng, sī àn-kiānn iû siōng-kip ki-kuan ho̍k-sím ê kuè-tîng, tong-sū hong iau-kiû tsìng-sik king-kái kuan-hong kuat-tīng. Siōng-sòo kì-sī kiù-tsìng tshò-ngōo ê kuè-tîng, mā sī tîng-tshing hām kái-sueh huat-lu̍t ê kuè-tîng.[1] Sui-bóng siōng-sòo huat-īnn í-king tsûn-tsāi sòo tshing-nî; m̄-kuh ing-bí huat kok-ka it-tit-kàu 19 sè-kí tsiah kā khíng-tīng ê siōng-sòo kuân la̍p-ji̍p in-ê phuànn-lē lāi-té.[2]

Tsù-kái

siu-kái
  1. See generally, Keenan D. Kmiec, The Origin & Current Meanings of "Judicial Activism", 92 Cal. L. Rev. 1441, 1442 (2004) (discussing contemporary discourse regarding judicial activism); Jonathan Mallamud, Prospective Limitation and the Rights of the Accused, 56 Iowa L.Rev. 321, 359 (1970) ("the power of the courts to contribute to the growth of the law in keeping with the demands of society"); Realist Jurisprudence & Prospective Overruling, 109 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1, 6 (1960) (discussing appeals as "a deliberate and conscious technique of judicial lawmaking"). (Eng-gí)
  2. Stan Keillor, Should Minnesota Recognize A State Constitutional Right to A Criminal Appeal?, 36 Hamline L. Rev. 399, 402 (2013). (Eng-gí)

Tsham-ua̍t

siu-kái
  • Civil procedure
  • List of legal topics
  • Judicial review
  • Appellate procedure in the Tsham-khónited States
  • Scope of review
  • Criminal appeal
  • Bí-kok chiu lu̍t-su kong-hōe

Guā-pōo liân-kiat

siu-kái