[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"public-home":3,"news-detail-popularize-811":403},{"entity":4,"seo":355},{"siteConfig":5,"banners":28,"branches":48,"honors":81,"cases":113,"caseTypes":197,"caseIntro":230,"latestLawyerNews":231,"lawyerNews":246,"lawyerNewsMonthCount":299,"serviceTags":300,"serviceCategories":301,"subSlogan":12,"serviceIntro":331,"homeStats":332,"serviceProducts":345},{"id":6,"siteName":7,"siteDomain":8,"logoUrl":9,"faviconUrl":10,"slogan":11,"subSlogan":12,"aboutSummary":13,"aboutImage":14,"teamPhotoUrl":15,"hotline":16,"email":10,"headquartersAddress":17,"headquartersLng":18,"headquartersLat":19,"foundingYear":20,"creditCode":10,"sameAs":10,"wechatQrcode":21,"videoQrcode":22,"douyinQrcode":23,"xiaohongshuQrcode":24,"icpNumber":25,"psbNumber":26,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":27},1,"四川卓安律师事务所","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F083753d8-b587-4105-a0e2-9da8eacdcfd5.png",null,"为生命辩护，为自由辩护","一家专注刑事，走「专门」路线的律师所","卓安律师事务所由执业近30年的成安博士于2013年发起设立，是全国最早一批专注刑事的刑事专业律师事务所之一。一心一意，只做刑事，不做综合所，不接非刑事业务。以专业化、精品化、一体化运营为全国客户提供刑事辩护、刑事控告、企业刑事合规与风险防控法律服务。","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002Fffef6a8d-e19d-44df-a8f1-08ece0042bd7.jpg","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F87a0be21-3874-4f87-8586-63a62fd10a31.jpg","4000-148-149","四川省成都高新区天府二街蜀都中心1号楼19楼1902-1904室",104.06749,30.5524575,"2003","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002Fb86da287-bc41-4285-aa3c-0602065190d2.jpg","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F77233542-14b7-4884-a78f-8c0d531d096d.png","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F616aa748-5454-49dd-a09d-a73925d672fe.png","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002F4b5bc9ea-d513-4287-8aca-0a589e539381.png","蜀ICP备2026035071号-1","川公网安备51019002009895号","2026-06-22 21:30:32",[29,34,39,42,45],{"id":6,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":33,"linkUrl":32,"sort":6,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:33:46",0,"","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002Ff8e758a5-0784-4769-aa52-97ec64cc1216.jpg",{"id":35,"createdAt":36,"updatedAt":36,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":37,"linkUrl":32,"sort":38,"status":6},3,"2026-07-14 14:39:20","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F557b3e37-70b1-4aa8-88d6-9a07b61969b1.png",2,{"id":40,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":41,"linkUrl":32,"sort":35,"status":6},5,"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F7512d49c-e31a-4bd1-a436-00de2d2d960f.png",{"id":43,"createdAt":30,"updatedAt":30,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":44,"linkUrl":32,"sort":43,"status":6},4,"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F27e2b0bf-cf18-4dd0-bb77-5853e0673a1b.png",{"id":38,"createdAt":46,"updatedAt":46,"deleted":31,"title":32,"subtitle":32,"imageUrl":47,"linkUrl":32,"sort":40,"status":6},"2026-07-14 14:39:06","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002F3c8f1908-114d-44bf-9e33-2818d8bfce89.png",[49,55,60,65,70,75],{"id":35,"createdAt":50,"updatedAt":51,"deleted":31,"code":52,"name":53,"address":17,"phone":16,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":54,"status":6},"2026-06-16 13:55:38","2026-08-24 21:29:48","chengdu","成都总所",-1,{"id":6,"createdAt":56,"updatedAt":56,"deleted":31,"code":57,"name":58,"address":59,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:46:09","kunming","昆明","云南省昆明市五华区和谐广场和谐B座第49层4909室",{"id":38,"createdAt":61,"updatedAt":61,"deleted":31,"code":62,"name":63,"address":64,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-22 21:46:31","shenzheng","深圳","广东省深圳市龙华区民塘路328号龙华区数字创新中心A座14层04、05号",{"id":43,"createdAt":66,"updatedAt":66,"deleted":31,"code":67,"name":68,"address":69,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-26 13:55:59","chongqing","重庆","重庆市渝北区湖山路虹陶大厦22层13-17号",{"id":40,"createdAt":71,"updatedAt":71,"deleted":31,"code":72,"name":73,"address":74,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-26 13:56:12","dazhou","达州","四川省达州市通川区永兴路146号恒基大厦二楼",{"id":76,"createdAt":77,"updatedAt":77,"deleted":31,"code":78,"name":79,"address":80,"phone":32,"thumbnail":32,"lng":10,"lat":10,"sort":31,"status":6},6,"2026-06-26 13:56:31","xining","西宁","青海省西宁市城东区南山东路创新创业大厦A座15楼",[82,88,94,100,105,109],{"id":6,"createdAt":83,"updatedAt":83,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":84,"thumbnail":85,"content":10,"publishTime":86,"sort":87,"status":6},"2026-06-26 14:01:11","四川卓安律师事务所党支部—“四川省律师行业党建标准化律师事务所党组织”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002F15b73500-33d0-4eae-ae82-192e3f44d1c3.jpg","2026-07-27 21:53:52",-3,{"id":38,"createdAt":89,"updatedAt":89,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":90,"thumbnail":91,"content":10,"publishTime":92,"sort":93,"status":6},"2026-06-28 22:22:47","四川卓安律师事务所——\"四川省律师行业文化名所\"","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002F3e628c5a-4df8-42d2-8667-d107a295f786.jpg","2026-08-26 17:05:47",-2,{"id":95,"createdAt":96,"updatedAt":96,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":97,"thumbnail":98,"content":10,"publishTime":99,"sort":54,"status":6},24,"2026-09-01 14:02:47","“司法云庭荟”法律职业共同体线上交流平台建设的全新创新做法入选最高人民检察院政治部《全国检察机关教育培训创新100例》","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F09\u002F01\u002F03c5415b-2799-4097-8c6b-95a6089d5a3c.jpg","2026-09-01 14:01:51",{"id":35,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":102,"thumbnail":103,"content":10,"publishTime":104,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-06-28 22:23:01","成安律师被评为“成都市优秀律师”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F26\u002Fdae82b8c-327b-437e-8c37-bc241a6bf780.jpg","2026-08-26 17:07:20",{"id":43,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":106,"thumbnail":107,"content":10,"publishTime":108,"sort":31,"status":6},"成安律师被聘请为“成都市人民政府第一届行政复议委员会委员”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F27\u002F92313a8b-8b6e-4cff-9c80-ec82331e9bc0.jpg","2026-08-27 14:01:26",{"id":40,"createdAt":101,"updatedAt":101,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"title":110,"thumbnail":111,"content":10,"publishTime":112,"sort":31,"status":6},"成安律师被聘请为“日知公益学习社团青年刑辩人才计划特聘导师”","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F27\u002Fb8c6c1f9-16e5-4f16-b3c3-a8833b9d4275.jpg","2026-08-27 14:03:31",[114,121,128,132,139,147,152,157,162,167,172,179,184,188,192],{"id":115,"title":116,"thumbnail":117,"summary":118,"caseTypeId":40,"caseTypeName":119,"caseTypeCode":120},679,"X某涉嫌毒品犯罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获减少罪名认定","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Ff48b1248-9e8e-4e41-9878-594db86d4c37.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名： 贩卖、 制造毒品罪 ， 非法持有毒品罪 ， 容留他人吸毒罪 结果： 法院采纳部分辩护意见， 主犯死刑 改判死缓，三名 从犯 获大幅减刑 亮点： 成功推翻非法持有毒品罪指控，减少罪名认定 揭示关键物证","毒品犯罪优秀案例","drug_crime",{"id":122,"title":123,"thumbnail":124,"summary":125,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},678,"Z某涉嫌单位行贿罪、串通招投标罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获缓刑","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fac43f3a8-ed7b-4975-848a-06cd1b6528a5.png","【案情简述】 2019年至 2021年期间，某科技股份有限公司法定代表人Z某为感谢时任石嘴山市某局党组书记、局长F某(已判决)在某科技股份有限公司承揽石嘴山市某监管项目、污染源企业全过程监管项目(一期和二期)及工程款拨付等方面提供的帮助，以","经济犯罪优秀案例","economic_crime",{"id":129,"title":130,"thumbnail":10,"summary":131,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},677,"D某涉嫌串通投标罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，成功取保候审","一、【案情简述】 嫌疑人D某于14年至18年期间在成都某建筑公司担任业务员，主要工作内容为代表公司与相关招标代理人、实际施工人等沟通、拉业务同时代表公司参与各建设项目的招投标工作，并代公司收取相应的借用资质费、招投标资料费等费用。2021年",{"id":133,"title":134,"thumbnail":135,"summary":136,"caseTypeId":35,"caseTypeName":137,"caseTypeCode":138},676,"H某涉嫌参加黑社会性质组织等罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师成功辩护，获减轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fedab7283-e35c-409b-8122-2c6c9fe1283e.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：参加黑社会性质组织罪（变更涉恶）、寻衅滋事罪、非法拘禁罪、敲诈勒索罪 结果： · 成功将“黑社会性质组织罪”变更为“恶势力犯罪集团”； · 敲诈勒索罪、非法拘禁罪指控被法院驳回； · 寻衅滋事罪仅认定","涉黑涉恶优秀案例","gang_crime",{"id":140,"title":141,"thumbnail":142,"summary":143,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},675,"F某涉嫌帮助信息网络罪，四川卓安律事务所律师团队为其辩护，撤销案件","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F4b71eb76-73b9-4634-8468-3b4fdc258de4.png","【案情简述】 当事人涉嫌帮信罪被移送审查起诉，家属到律所委托代理，办案律师担任当事人审查起诉阶段的辩护人。 【办案过程】 受委托人的委托，办案律师多次会见当事人，在会见时详细的了解了案情概况，梳理了案件脉络，并对委托人就当事人近况进行了简短",7,"网络新型犯罪优秀案例","cyber_crime",{"id":148,"title":149,"thumbnail":150,"summary":151,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},674,"Z某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案,四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F4bc54bd5-530f-4571-bb91-b1764056f10c.png","一、案情简介 2021年7月，嫌疑人Z某接到其朋友Y某电话，声称想借用其银行卡过几笔钱用于购买比特币，同时可以给予其一些报酬。Z某因碍于朋友情面且因可以获得一些报酬于是就爽快答应了朋友Y某的请求。随后其朋友Y某利用Z某的银行账户、手机银行等",{"id":153,"title":154,"thumbnail":155,"summary":156,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},673,"Z某某帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所团队律师辩护，获得轻判","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F6a14490f-6000-4231-b1bc-b6b7e49896e1.png","一、【案情简述】 检察机关指控：2021年至2022年期间，F某（已判）从事虚假几份兑换商城，委托被告人z某某提供技术。T某于2021年9月开始加如与F某某共同经营。经营模式：由Z某某架设一个虚假积分商城，F某某T某通过联系短信运营商群发虚",{"id":158,"title":159,"thumbnail":160,"summary":161,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},672,"X某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获从轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F7cb8848d-9acb-4179-bb2d-9d97da88c122.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪 结果：判处有期徒刑九个月（已扣除先行羁押6日），罚金五千元。 亮点： 1. 成功认定自首情节，依法从轻处罚 2. 通过详实的证据链反驳“主观明知”推定，避免更重量刑 3. 针对",{"id":163,"title":164,"thumbnail":165,"summary":166,"caseTypeId":144,"caseTypeName":145,"caseTypeCode":146},671,"Ｈ某涉嫌帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获不批捕并取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F71406e62-2a27-46bb-b2da-b2d62c69d2c4.png","一、案情简介 H某在其浙江老家，当地一直有许多沿海一带的人来收购电话卡、银行卡等。H某一位成都的朋友正好在做倒卖公司公账银行卡的生意，因此希望H某帮其寻找买家。H某遂帮其牵线，介绍了一位姓名不详的江浙人给其成都的朋友，并帮忙将交易价款转给成",{"id":168,"title":169,"thumbnail":170,"summary":171,"caseTypeId":43,"caseTypeName":126,"caseTypeCode":127},670,"M某涉嫌组织、领导传销活动罪，四川卓安律所钟灵柔律师为其辩护，在批准逮捕后最终获得适用缓刑的量刑建议并取保候审","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002Fdda305e0-6546-4f71-9536-2bef2b87fbf4.png","一、案情简介 涉及上亿资金的虚拟币投资平台，M某因涉嫌组织、领导传销活动罪被检察院批准逮捕。 二、办案过程 承办律师在接受当事人家属委托之后，立即前往办案单位递交委托手续并开展会见工作，客观公正地分析了案件情况。同时承办律师与承办人就案件存",{"id":173,"title":174,"thumbnail":175,"summary":176,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},669,"W某涉嫌贪污罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获轻判","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F26\u002F59efab79-758e-4ba5-8c49-a30e75e5d97d.png","一、【案情简述】 2019 年4月，被告人S某通过朋友介绍认识了被告人Z某，S某以能源集团收购加油站负责人的身份，提出能源集团收购J加油站的意向，并提出如收购完成，能源集团领导将从套取的资金中收取好处费人民币 500万元(以下未标明币种的均","职务犯罪优秀案例","duty_crime",{"id":180,"title":181,"thumbnail":182,"summary":183,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},668,"X某涉嫌贪污罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，获从轻处罚","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F23\u002Fb40331c5-0aeb-4e4d-bce7-3e6dee0fe939.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪 结果：被告人X某（原医保局审核股股长）被判处有期徒刑三年六个月，罚金二十万元。 亮点： 1. 成功将被告人定性为 从犯 ，减轻处罚 2. 排除部分涉案金额（证言中的两笔资金未被认定） 3. 全",{"id":185,"title":186,"thumbnail":10,"summary":187,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},667,"周某某涉嫌贪污罪、受贿罪一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，成功核减犯罪数额并获从宽量刑","一、案件受贿罪结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪、受贿罪 结果：数罪并罚判处有期徒刑18年，罚金530万元（起诉指控贪污7099.5482万元，辩护后法院采纳部分意见核减数额）。 亮点： 1. 成功论证部分阶段不构成贪污罪主体资格，核减",{"id":189,"title":190,"thumbnail":10,"summary":191,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},666,"L某涉嫌贪污罪、受贿罪、巨额财产来源不明罪，四川卓安律师事务所律师团队为其辩护，获轻判","律师工作： 阅卷阅卷，不停的阅卷 案件焦点： 案件程序问题：本案监委是否有管辖职权； 犯罪数额计算，这些数字对不对 案件结果： 做到了每个罪名的法定最低档量刑了 1.犯 贪污罪 ，判处 有期徒刑 一年，并处十 罚金 万元; 2.犯 受贿罪 ",{"id":193,"title":194,"thumbnail":195,"summary":196,"caseTypeId":38,"caseTypeName":177,"caseTypeCode":178},665,"陈某涉嫌贪污罪二审改判一案，四川卓安律师事务所律师为其辩护，刑期由13年改判为11年","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F23\u002F3afa7596-457f-43b0-93e2-8c05f101c723.png","一、案件结果、亮点、焦点、封面语 罪名：贪污罪（二审改判） 结果：刑期由13年改判为11年，罚金100万元维持 亮点： 成功挑战贪污罪定性争议，推动法院对\"公共财产\"性质进行专项审查 通过精细化数额计算辩护，核减指控金额达76%（1353万",[198,201,204,207,210,215,218,224],{"id":38,"code":178,"name":177,"summary":199,"keywords":200},"覆盖贪污罪、受贿罪、行贿罪、挪用公款罪、滥用职权罪、玩忽职守罪等。","监察留置｜公职人员辩护｜数额认定",{"id":35,"code":138,"name":137,"summary":202,"keywords":203},"覆盖组织、领导、参加黑社会性质组织罪，以及寻衅滋事、敲诈勒索、聚众斗殴等。","黑恶性质认定｜组织层级｜罪数认定",{"id":43,"code":127,"name":126,"summary":205,"keywords":206},"覆盖诈骗罪、合同诈骗罪、非法吸收公众存款罪、非法经营罪、虚开增值税专用发票罪等。","企业家辩护｜涉案金额｜刑民交叉",{"id":40,"code":120,"name":119,"summary":208,"keywords":209},"覆盖走私、贩卖、运输、制造毒品罪，非法持有毒品罪及制毒物品犯罪。","毒品数量认定｜主观明知｜死刑辩护",{"id":76,"code":211,"name":212,"summary":213,"keywords":214},"property_crime","财产犯罪优秀案例","覆盖盗窃罪、抢劫罪、诈骗罪、敲诈勒索罪、职务侵占罪、挪用资金罪等。","非法占有目的｜涉案金额｜退赔谅解",{"id":144,"code":146,"name":145,"summary":216,"keywords":217},"覆盖帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪、电信网络诈骗、侵犯公民个人信息罪、开设赌场罪等。\n","电子数据审查｜主观明知｜资金流水",{"id":219,"code":220,"name":221,"summary":222,"keywords":223},8,"corporate_compliance","性犯罪优秀案例","覆盖强奸罪、强制猥亵罪、猥亵儿童罪、组织卖淫罪、传播淫秽物品罪等。\n","言词证据｜未成年人案件｜隐私保护",{"id":225,"code":226,"name":227,"summary":228,"keywords":229},9,"criminal_complaint","人身权利犯罪优秀案例","覆盖故意杀人罪、故意伤害罪、非法拘禁罪、绑架罪、过失致人死亡罪等。","正当防卫｜因果关系｜伤情鉴定","多年来，卓安专注刑事领域，累计办理刑事案件8000余件，依法为当事人争取无罪、取保候审、缓刑、不起诉、从轻及减轻处罚等结果。",{"id":232,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":234,"city":235,"caseType":236,"title":237,"thumbnail":238,"content":10,"publishTime":239,"sort":10,"status":10,"lawyerNames":240,"lawyers":241,"lawyer":245},790,"2026-10-13 13:51:35",78,"白山中院+吉林省看守所","受贿罪","2026年10月12、13日 彭栖伟 受贿罪——卓安（重庆）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002Faeff63f5-4734-44b5-83fc-4fe483db46a8.png","2026-10-13 14:12:39","彭栖伟",[242],{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"专职律师","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F18\u002Fe7e138d0-374e-40f4-8a64-17f2eaa16ca6.jpg",{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},[247,250,263,275,287],{"id":232,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":234,"city":235,"caseType":236,"title":237,"thumbnail":238,"content":10,"publishTime":239,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":240,"lawyers":248},[249],{"id":234,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":240,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":244,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},{"id":251,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":252,"city":253,"caseType":254,"title":255,"thumbnail":256,"content":10,"publishTime":257,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":258,"lawyers":259},789,43,"宣汉县看守所","诈骗罪","2026年10月13日 晏建强 诈骗罪——卓安律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F9784a2ad-b503-4c72-8998-7d785f08998c.png","2026-10-13 14:11:53","晏建强",[260],{"id":252,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":258,"position":261,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":262,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"刑事四部 部长","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F18\u002Fab5ccf97-3ef1-4db5-a101-a5f001ec2350.jpg",{"id":264,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":265,"city":266,"caseType":267,"title":268,"thumbnail":269,"content":10,"publishTime":270,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":271,"lawyers":272},788,84,"重庆永川区看守所+永川区检察院","寻衅滋事罪","2026年10月12日 罗杨 寻衅滋事罪——卓安（重庆）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F3df2920f-f2e5-4b8d-ae33-50efa7329c5d.png","2026-10-12 13:59:59","罗杨",[273],{"id":265,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":271,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":274,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F08\u002F20\u002F71393bb0-30d8-4028-ad17-529bfa81f91d.jpg",{"id":276,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":277,"city":278,"caseType":279,"title":280,"thumbnail":281,"content":10,"publishTime":282,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":283,"lawyers":284},787,98,"深圳市宝安区看守所","非法经营罪","2026年10月12日 彭乐程 非法经营罪——卓安（深圳）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002Fd8cbbe6b-17e3-472d-8660-19788cf7258d.png","2026-10-12 13:59:15","彭乐程",[285],{"id":277,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":283,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":286,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F09\u002F09\u002F3e3833d3-0396-48d7-9b5f-7729393a0976.jpg",{"id":288,"createdAt":233,"updatedAt":233,"deleted":31,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"lawyerId":289,"city":290,"caseType":291,"title":292,"thumbnail":293,"content":10,"publishTime":294,"sort":31,"status":6,"lawyerNames":295,"lawyers":296},786,10,"深圳市罗湖区人民检察院","猥亵儿童罪","2026年10月12日 陈志伟 猥亵儿童罪——卓安（深圳）律师事务所","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F13\u002F8b14a2f4-88d1-4d09-a2e1-385982107474.png","2026-10-12 13:58:30","陈志伟",[297],{"id":289,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":10,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10,"schemaExtra":10,"name":295,"position":243,"branchId":10,"categoryId":10,"avatar":298,"content":10,"sort":10,"status":10},"\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F06\u002Fd8b580fc-0c38-493a-aa21-2e3b581a7b9e.png",40,[],[302,307,312,317,322,327],{"id":40,"createdAt":303,"updatedAt":304,"deleted":31,"code":305,"name":306,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":31,"status":6},"2026-08-17 10:39:04","2026-10-13 16:28:19","XINGSHIHEGUI","服务品质",{"id":6,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":308,"deleted":31,"code":309,"name":310,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":311,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":6,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:28:13","criminal","服务范围","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002Fca98263c-68cd-4768-8c9e-ccc0086eade9.jpg",{"id":38,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":313,"deleted":31,"code":314,"name":315,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":316,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":38,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:29:23","key_crime","服务方式","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F5df41c7a-813a-48db-8eb7-057f5019ab32.jpg",{"id":35,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":318,"deleted":31,"code":319,"name":320,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":321,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":35,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:29:52","corporate","服务流程","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F40c30169-fc75-40bc-a144-8f9b4261f108.jpg",{"id":144,"createdAt":323,"updatedAt":324,"deleted":31,"code":325,"name":326,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":43,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:30:32","2026-10-13 16:30:42","fuwutiyan","服务体验",{"id":219,"createdAt":328,"updatedAt":328,"deleted":31,"code":329,"name":330,"summary":32,"displayTags":10,"icon":32,"thumbnail":10,"content":10,"sort":40,"status":6},"2026-10-13 16:31:42","fuwushoufei","服务收费原则","卓安以刑事专业能力为企业提供风险识别、合规治理、专项培训与危机处置支持，帮助企业在复杂经营环境中守住法律底线。",[333,336,339,342],{"value":334,"label":335},"8000+","成功案例",{"value":337,"label":338},"600+","锦旗感谢",{"value":340,"label":341},"100+","法律服务产品",{"value":343,"label":344},"6","全国分所",[346,349,352],{"title":347,"desc":348},"刑事诉讼类服务","律师会见、法律咨询、专家论证、案件指导\u002F协作、立案\u002F取保\u002F不起诉\u002F无罪\u002F罪轻等全阶段辩护。",{"title":350,"desc":351},"刑事风控类服务","风控计划、风控评估、执法调查应对、企业全生命周期刑事风控与重点行业\u002F领域风控。",{"title":353,"desc":354},"刑事普法类服务","政策宣讲、知识付费、轻法服务（线上咨询、文书范本、解决方案）等上百项精准化产品。",{"title":356,"description":13,"keywords":357,"canonical":358,"image":10,"jsonLd":359},"四川卓安律师事务所 - 专注刑事辩护的专业律所","刑事辩护,律师事务所,四川卓安","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F",[360],{"@context":361,"@graph":362},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org",[363,369],{"@type":364,"@id":365,"url":358,"name":7,"inLanguage":366,"publisher":367},"WebSite","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#website","zh-CN",{"@id":368},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#organization",{"@type":370,"@id":368,"name":7,"url":358,"logo":371,"image":371,"description":13,"telephone":16,"email":10,"foundingDate":20,"taxID":10,"inLanguage":366,"address":372,"geo":375,"department":377},"LegalService","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F07\u002F083753d8-b587-4105-a0e2-9da8eacdcfd5.png",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":17,"addressCountry":374},"PostalAddress","CN",{"@type":376,"latitude":19,"longitude":18},"GeoCoordinates",[378,383,387,391,395,399],{"@type":379,"@id":380,"name":53,"image":10,"telephone":16,"address":381,"parentOrganization":382},"LocalBusiness","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-chengdu",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":17},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":384,"name":58,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":385,"parentOrganization":386},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-kunming",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":59},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":388,"name":63,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":389,"parentOrganization":390},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-shenzheng",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":64},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":392,"name":68,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":393,"parentOrganization":394},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-chongqing",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":69},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":396,"name":73,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":397,"parentOrganization":398},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-dazhou",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":74},{"@id":368},{"@type":379,"@id":400,"name":79,"image":10,"telephone":32,"address":401,"parentOrganization":402},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002F#branch-xining",{"@type":373,"streetAddress":80},{"@id":368},{"entity":404,"seo":415},{"id":405,"createdAt":10,"updatedAt":406,"deleted":10,"seoTitle":32,"seoDescription":32,"seoKeywords":32,"schemaExtra":10,"typeId":35,"title":407,"thumbnail":408,"content":409,"publishTime":410,"sort":10,"status":10,"newsType":411},811,"2026-10-14 17:40:19","前检察官何冰冰解答：国企单位中集体研究的决定出事了，责任算在谁头上？","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F14\u002F742dee7f-d65b-4b9a-884a-559b9a4e7c9c.jpg","\u003Cp>【核心结论】集体研究从来不是免责的挡箭牌，但它也不是全员连坐。真正决定谁坐牢、谁没事的，不是那枚公章，也不只是最后那一个签名，而是当事人在那场会上扮演了什么角色、表了什么态、有没有留下记录。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这事是班子开会、集体研究定下来的，又不是我家人一个人拍的板，文件上那么多人都签了字，凭什么现在责任全算到他头上。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这是职务犯罪家属问得最多的问题之一。有人觉得太不公平，还有人反过来想：集体研究嘛，要担责大家一起担，总不能只抓一个。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这两种想法，一个指向“我家人不该担责”，一个指向“要担一起担”，但都建立在同一个误判上，就是把集体研究当成了一个能分责任、也能挡责任的容器。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>真实情况是，两头都不成立。集体决策的账，是按人头分的账，不是平摊的账。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>集体决策出了事，责任其实有一本按人头分的账。下面分四层拆开讲。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>第一层：会是集体开的，责任却按人头分\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>以“集体研究”形式作出的渎职决策，照样要追究负有责任的领导人员的刑事责任。办案机关认的是具体的人，不是“单位”这两个字。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>两高早就把这个态度写进了司法解释。《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理渎职刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释（一）》（法释〔2012〕18号，2012年7月9日最高人民法院审判委员会第1552次会议、2012年9月12日最高人民检察院第十一届检察委员会第79次会议通过，2012年12月7日公布，自2013年1月9日起施行）第五条写明：国家机关负责人员违法决定，或者指使、授意、强令其他国家机关工作人员违法履行职务或者不履行职务，构成刑法分则第九章规定的渎职犯罪的，应当依法追究刑事责任；以“集体研究”形式实施的渎职犯罪，应当依照刑法分则第九章的规定追究国家机关负有责任的人员的刑事责任。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这条解释出台时，两高新闻发布会专门解释过它要纠正的现象：多人特别是上下级共同实施渎职时，违法决定的负责人员往往以“只负间接的领导责任”开脱，或者拿“经集体研究”当托辞推诿，实践中有的只追究了具体执行人员，形成“抓小放大”。司法解释要纠正的，正是这种责任倒挂。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>换句话说，纪委监委办案、法院下判，认的从来不是“单位”这两个字，而是具体的人：谁主持、谁拍板、谁分管、谁推动、谁附和。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>责任转成刑期，是有明确刻度的。国家机关工作人员的渎职，对应《中华人民共和国刑法》第三百九十七条的滥用职权罪、玩忽职守罪，致使公共财产、国家和人民利益遭受重大损失的，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役；情节特别严重的，处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑。重大损失和情节特别严重怎么算，还是这部司法解释第一条：造成经济损失30万元以上的，属于“重大损失”；150万元以上的，属于“情节特别严重”。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>国有企业这条线另有对应罪名。《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百六十八条规定了国有公司、企业、事业单位人员失职罪和滥用职权罪，处三年以下有期徒刑或者拘役；致使国家利益遭受特别重大损失的，处三年以上七年以下有期徒刑。按最高人民检察院、公安部关于经济犯罪案件追诉标准的规定，国有公司人员失职造成国家直接经济损失50万元以上的应予追诉，滥用职权造成30万元以上的应予追诉。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>第二层：同一张会议桌前，四种人四种结局\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">在会上的角色\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">通常的认定\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">责任轻重\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">决定性动作\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">主持会议、最后拍板的一把手\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">直接负责的主管人员\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">最重\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">拍板\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">直接分管、提出方案、推动落地\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">直接负责的主管人员\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">重\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">推动\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">跟着举手、表态同意的一般班子成员\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">其他责任人员\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">相对轻，但不是没事\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">附和\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">会上明确提出反对或保留意见、记入会议记录与表决记录、最终未被采纳\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">可不予问责或免予问责\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">可能脱身\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">留痕\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp>党纪依据很直接。《中国共产党问责条例》（2019年8月25日中共中央修订印发）第十七条第一款第二项规定，“在集体决策中对错误决策提出明确反对意见或者保留意见的”，可以不予问责或者免予问责。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>国企这条线的实践更细。“三重一大”决策制度，也就是重大决策、重要人事任免、重大项目安排和大额资金运作必须集体讨论决定，其地方与企业的实施办法普遍写了同一句话：参与决策的人员证明在会议表决时曾表明异议，并在会议记录中有明确记载的，可免除相应责任。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>关键就在“留痕”两个字。你心里不认同、嘴上没说，或者会上小声嘟囔一句、事后弃权不表态，会议记录里什么都没有，等于没反对，照样跑不掉。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这里有两个常见误区。误区一，把“没在会上说话”当成没有责任。沉默在追责里不等于反对，弃权也不等于反对。误区二，把“签了字”直接等同于“主犯”。签名只是参与链条的一环，真正定轻重的是角色和表态。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>第三层：签字到底意味着什么\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>签字在法律上不是走流程，是你审核过、把关过、同意担责的证据。但追责从来不是只追签字的那一个人。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>很多人把签字当流程，手一抬就签了，事后一句“我又没具体经手”就想摘出去。法律不这么看。签字证明你审核过、把关过、同意担责。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>中国纪检监察报公开过一起案子。某州中小企业融资担保有限公司董事长蔡某某，对相关贷款担保申请“一签了之”，不核实、不过问、不研判，轻信下属已经把关，结果公司代偿后1788万余元债权无法追回，国有资产遭受损失。办案机关认定这正是典型的不正确履行职责，属于刑法上的“严重不负责任”，最终以国有公司人员失职罪追究其刑事责任。这个案子里，他没有主动做任何一件事，问题恰恰就出在“什么都没做，就签了字”。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>但也要说句公道话：追责不是只追签字的那一个人。会议主持人、提议的人、实际推动的人、最后真正从这笔决定里拿到好处的人，都可能被追着算账。签名只是一条线索，从来不是全部。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>看一起公开宣判的案子就清楚。2025年1月17日，淄博市中级人民法院一审公开宣判山东国惠投资控股集团有限公司原党委书记、董事长尹鹏案：以受贿罪判处有期徒刑十一年，以国有公司人员滥用职权罪判处有期徒刑三年六个月，决定执行有期徒刑十二年。法院认定其滥用职权造成国有公司损失共计15712万余元。这里被追究的，是拍板决策的一把手，而且是数罪并罚，并不是某个只负责签字的下属。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>第四层：一句“是领导让我干的”，根本不顶用\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>【核心结论】法律对具体执行人员是有分寸的，分寸就在两点上：你有没有提出反对意见，这个决定是不是明显违法。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>具体办事的人常问：领导拍的板，我一个干活的也有罪。法律是有分寸的。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>还是这部司法解释第五条，后半段专门讲了执行人员：对于具体执行人员，应当在综合认定其行为性质、是否提出反对意见、危害结果大小等情节的基础上，决定是否追究刑事责任和应当判处的刑罚。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>党纪这边的规定同样留了口子。《中国共产党问责条例》第十七条第二款规定，对上级错误决定提出改正或者撤销意见未被采纳，因而出现问责情形的，同样可以不予或者免予问责；同时写明，上级错误决定明显违法违规的，应当承担相应的责任。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>把这两段合起来读，就是一张分情况的对照表。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">执行时的情形\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">结果\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">认为决定有错、正式提出改正意见、领导坚持要执行\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">后果由领导承担\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">决定明显违法，明知不对仍照着办\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">执行者本人一样担责\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">只是按流程签字，没有审核权限也无从审核\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">综合认定，可作为从轻情节\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp>“领导安排的”这五个字，挡不住明摆着的犯罪。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>另外要留意一个新动向。《中国共产党纪律处分条例》（2023年12月中共中央修订发布）在“违反民主集中制原则”一款里，把四种行为单列处理，其中一种是“借集体决策名义集体违规”。这句话的分量在于，集体研究不再是规避责任的通道，拿集体决策当幌子搞违规，本身就是要处理的行为。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>辩护视角：责任怎么一层层往下剥\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>这类案件的辩护核心，是把当事人在会议链条上的位置还原出来：是拍板的、附和的，还是反对过的；有没有被指使、胁迫，有没有自己从中拿钱。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>遇到这种案子，律师要做的第一件事，是把会议记录、表决票、签到表、会议录音、请示批示、签批单全部调出来，还原当事人到底是拍板的、附和的，还是反对过的；同时查清有没有被指使、胁迫，有没有自己从中拿钱。把这些讲清楚，就可能把责任从“直接负责的主管人员”辩到“其他责任人员”，甚至为提过反对意见的人争取不起诉、从宽处理。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>卓安律师事务所主任何冰冰律师办理的一起案件，就是责任与罪名双重拆解的典型。他是前员额检察官、公诉人、前反贪局侦查科科长，熟悉侦查与公诉两个环节按什么口径卡责任。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>类案一，Z某某涉嫌受贿罪、滥用职权罪案。检察院量刑建议是三年以上实刑，辩护从责任层级和罪名构成两头拆解，最终当事人被判处有期徒刑二年、缓刑三年。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>类案二，卓安律师团队办理的S某涉嫌滥用职权案。当事人在负责户籍管理工作期间，未严格审查落户资料，为多名不符合条件的人员办理了购房落户。案件在审查起诉阶段，指控的罪名由玩忽职守变更为滥用职权。辩护从罪过形式入手，指出滥用职权在主观方面仍应属于过失，行为人对办理行为的故意不等于对危害结果的希望或者放任，且实际危害后果轻微、本人已被免职，最终法院判处有期徒刑一年二个月，缓刑一年六个月。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>还有一种是彻底出罪的。在卓安实现的人民法院生效无罪判决里，就有王某某滥用职权案。这提醒我们，渎职案件并不是签了字就只能认，责任链条拆得清楚，边界是可以争的。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cstrong>三个最容易踩的误区，和家属现在能做的三件事\u003C\u002Fstrong>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">家属常见的想法\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">法律上的实际情况\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">集体研究是大家一起定的，要担一起担\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">以“集体研究”形式实施渎职，照样追究负有责任的人员，责任按角色分，不会平摊\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">签了字就是主要责任\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">签名是参与链条的一环，不是定论，角色与表态才决定轻重\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">“领导让干的”，执行的人没事\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">明显违法的决定仍照办，执行者一样担责，只有提出过反对意见且有留痕，才可能免责\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">到处找人打听、统一说法\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">可能被认定为串供、妨碍作证，反而加重风险\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp>第一件事，把留痕材料固定下来。对照下表逐项找。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Ctable style=\"width: auto;\">\u003Ctbody>\u003Ctr>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">材料类别\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">具体内容\u003C\u002Fth>\u003Cth colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">用途\u003C\u002Fth>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">会议记录\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">会议纪要、议题记录、讨论过程记录\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">还原谁主持、谁提议、谁表态，反对意见有没有被记入\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">表决与签到\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">表决票、签到表、会议录音录像\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">证明当场表了什么态\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">签批文件\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">请示、批示、签批单、呈批件\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">区分审核、把关、终审三个环节各由谁完成\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">分工与任职\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">分管文件、任职文件、岗位职责\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">证明当事人对该事项有没有决定权、审核权\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">资金与流向\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">合同、转账凭证、资金最终去向\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">查清谁实际推动、谁从中获利\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003Ctr>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">谈话与通知\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">已收到的书面通知、谈话记录线索\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003Ctd colSpan=\"1\" rowSpan=\"1\" width=\"auto\">确认程序进展、明确当前所处阶段\u003C\u002Ftd>\u003C\u002Ftr>\u003C\u002Ftbody>\u003C\u002Ftable>\u003Cp>第二件事，不统一说法。不删改、不补签、不倒签材料，不联系同案人员与证人串说法。把握不准的，先问律师，不要自行试探。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>第三件事，做一次责任层级评估。评估要回答三个问题：当事人在会议链条上是哪个位置；有没有反对意见的留痕；哪些材料能证明他只是执行、没有决定权。这三个问题答清楚，责任该往下剥的，才有空间往下剥。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>常见问题：\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>一，会议记录能调到吗？ 会议记录一般随案调取，属于卷宗材料。家属自行很难取得，但律师在会见、阅卷阶段可以申请调取并逐页核对。重点核两处：反对意见有没有被原样记入，当事人的表态有没有被概括或改写。这两处在实际办案中常有偏差。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>二，会上弃权、没表态，算不算反对？ 不算。党纪和“三重一大”制度的口子，给的是“明确提出反对意见或者保留意见”，并且要“在会议记录中有明确记载”。弃权、沉默、会后抱怨，都不满足这两个条件。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>三，家属现在先做什么？ 先别急着找关系、统一说法。把能拿到手的书面材料按上面那张表收拢、留存原件，整理出一份当事人参会与签批的时间线，然后带材料做一次责任层级评估。越早把责任位置摸清楚，后面能争的空间越大。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>四，责任最后要看哪里认定？ 职务犯罪的责任划分，由纪检监察机关、检察机关、法院依法认定。具体到个案，还要结合罪名、损失数额、当事人职务层级、当地司法实践综合判断，不能一概而论。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>附一：条文与案例索引\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>《中华人民共和国刑法》第三百九十七条，滥用职权罪、玩忽职守罪。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>《中华人民共和国刑法》第一百六十八条，国有公司、企业、事业单位人员失职罪，国有公司、企业、事业单位人员滥用职权罪。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>《最高人民法院、最高人民检察院关于办理渎职刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释（一）》（法释〔2012〕18号，2012年7月9日最高人民法院审判委员会第1552次会议、2012年9月12日最高人民检察院第十一届检察委员会第79次会议通过，2012年12月7日公布，自2013年1月9日起施行），第一条，第五条。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>《中国共产党问责条例》（2019年8月25日中共中央修订印发），第十七条。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>《中国共产党纪律处分条例》（2023年12月中共中央修订发布），违反民主集中制原则的处分规定。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>最高人民检察院、公安部关于经济犯罪案件追诉标准的规定，国有公司、企业、事业单位人员失职案、滥用职权案的追诉标准。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅转发的《关于进一步推进国有企业贯彻落实“三重一大”决策制度的意见》，以及各地、各企业实施办法中的异议免责条款。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>中国纪检监察报公开案例，某州中小企业融资担保有限公司董事长蔡某某国有公司人员失职案。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>公开宣判案例，山东国惠投资控股集团有限公司原党委书记、董事长尹鹏受贿、国有公司人员滥用职权案，2025年1月17日淄博市中级人民法院一审宣判。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>卓安律师事务所办理案例，Z某某受贿罪、滥用职权罪案，S某滥用职权案，王某某滥用职权案。均已脱敏，结果以法律文书为准。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>附二：关于何冰冰主任与卓安律师事务所\u003Cbr>何冰冰｜四川卓安律师事务所主任\u003Cbr>贪污受贿案件证据审查｜行贿及单位行贿案件辩护｜认罪认罚案件辩护｜鉴定意见审查与质证｜留置阶段职务犯罪应对｜前检察官视角的侦查公诉逻辑研判\u003Cbr>四川卓安律师事务所主任，卓安刑事诉讼业务委员会副主任，成都市刑事专业辩护委员会秘书。前员额检察官、公诉人，前反贪局侦查科科长，市级检察机关控申办案能手，记二等功一次。\u003Cbr>深耕法律领域十余年，参与办理各类刑事案件 1000+ 件（统计方式为律所内结案归档数量），熟悉刑事案件全流程办理逻辑，擅长拆解案件疑点、从证据链入手制定辩护策略。代表案例：Z 某某涉嫌受贿罪、滥用职权罪一案，从检察院建议\"三年以上实刑\"争取到判二缓三；某医院副院长 L 某受贿案，涉案金额四百余万元，争取立功情节后获降档处理；F 某涉嫌受贿罪一案，涉案金额 1000 余万元，法院采纳构成自首、积极退赃等辩护意见后从轻处罚。\u003Cbr>执业信条：倾之力，筑所成。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>免责声明\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>本文根据法律法规、公开案例与律所公开资料整理，仅供一般刑事法律信息参考，不构成对任何律师或机构的官方排名、执业评价、个案法律意见或结果承诺。是否构成犯罪、责任与罪名如何认定，由司法机关依法认定。集体决策中的责任划分、是否属于负有责任的人员、能否适用不予问责或免予问责的情形等问题，需要根据具体案件事实、证据和法律规定综合判断。文中案例均已脱敏处理，既往个案结果不代表未来案件结果。\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp> \u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>专注刑事，更专注人的价值。卓安律师事务所\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>官方网站：\u003Ca href=\"http:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\" target=\"\">www.zhuoanlaw.com\u003C\u002Fa>\u003C\u002Fp>\u003Cp>\u003Cbr>\u003C\u002Fp>","2026-10-14 17:39:28",{"id":35,"createdAt":27,"updatedAt":27,"deleted":31,"code":412,"name":413,"icon":414,"sort":35,"status":6,"seoTitle":10,"seoDescription":10,"seoKeywords":10},"popularize","人群分类","\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F07\u002F14\u002Fa79f025c-03af-4818-a0ce-29cecf8e15e9.png",{"title":416,"description":417,"keywords":32,"canonical":418,"image":408,"jsonLd":419},"前检察官何冰冰解答：国企单位中集体研究的决定出事了，责任算在谁头上？ - 人群分类 | 四川卓安律师事务所","【核心结论】集体研究从来不是免责的挡箭牌，但它也不是全员连坐。真正决定谁坐牢、谁没事的，不是那枚公章，也不只是最后那一个签名，而是当事人在那场会上扮演了什么角色、表了什么态、有没有留下记录。 这事是班子开会、集体研究定下来的，又不是我家人一个人拍的板，文件上那么多人都签了字，凭什么现在责任全算到他头上。 这是职务犯罪家","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fnews\u002Fpopularize\u002F811",[420],{"@context":361,"@graph":421},[422,429],{"@type":423,"@id":418,"url":418,"headline":407,"description":417,"datePublished":424,"dateModified":425,"author":426,"publisher":427,"articleSection":413,"inLanguage":366,"image":428},"Article","2026-10-14T17:39:28+08:00","2026-10-14T17:40:19+08:00",{"@id":368},{"@id":368},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fuploads\u002F2026\u002F10\u002F14\u002F742dee7f-d65b-4b9a-884a-559b9a4e7c9c.jpg",{"@type":430,"itemListElement":431},"BreadcrumbList",[432,435,437],{"@type":433,"position":6,"name":434,"item":358},"ListItem","首页",{"@type":433,"position":38,"name":413,"item":436},"https:\u002F\u002Fwww.zhuoanlaw.com\u002Fnews\u002Fpopularize",{"@type":433,"position":35,"name":407,"item":418}]