当前，人脸识别证据在刑事司法实践中已被作为法定证据或其他证据材料予以运用， 并在刑事案件中发挥出了较强的证明作用，其实际上已成为犯罪指控与刑事裁判证据体系 的组成部分。然而，由于相应证据应用规范的缺失，其在刑事诉讼中彰显提高诉讼效率、 降低证明难度等重要作用的同时，亦蕴含着等价的风险，仍面临着证据属性不明、取证具 有任意性、质证流于形式及认证存有主观倾向性等问题。因此，亟需明确其法律地位，并 在此基础上构建符合我国人脸识别证据特点及应用状态的证据规则，从而更好地发挥其在 刑事诉讼中的积极作用。

       本文主要分为四个部分：第一部分，对人脸识别技术及人脸识别证据的基本概念进行 界定，并在此基础上进一步剖析其形成机理及内在特征，为明确其实践表现形式提供理论 基础。第二部分，通过对中国裁判文书网中应用人脸识别证据作为定案根据的刑事案例进 行研究，从实证角度详细介绍了其在刑事诉讼中的具体应用状况，并基于该刑事司法实践 情况，探究其在应用中面临的困境与风险，为正确规制人脸识别证据在刑事案件中的运用， 更好地发挥其对案件事实的证明价值提供现实依据。第三部分，则是基于美国在人脸识别 技术领域的实践优势及其对人脸识别证据较为深厚的研究理论，选取美国为域外研究对象， 对其应用人脸识别证据的实践现状进行考察，并对其将人脸识别证据引入刑事审判的相关 规制路径进行研究梳理，依次从限制侦查取证、严格当庭质证、慎重审查可采性的角度展 开讨论，以期借鉴其精神内核，探寻出适合我国国情的规制路径。第四部分，针对人脸识 别证据在刑事诉讼应用中存在的现实困境，立足我国刑事司法实践，在辩证借鉴域外规制 经验的基础上，为我国人脸识别证据的规则构建提出建议。首先，为解决其因证据属性不 明而饱受质疑的证据能力问题，必须从法律上对人脸识别证据予以合理定位；其次，针对 实践中实务部门对人脸识别证据的迥异运用方式，我们须从取证、质证、认证的角度构建 起相应的证据规则，以解决其适用问题。

      At present, facial recognition evidence has been used as statutory evidence or other evidence materials in criminal justice practice, and has played a strong role in proving criminal cases, and it has actually become an integral part of the evidence system for criminal charges and criminal judgments. However, due to the lack of corresponding evidence application norms, while it highlights the important role of improving litigation efficiency and reducing the difficulty of proof in criminal proceedings, it also contains equivalent risks, and still faces problems such as unclear nature of evidence, arbitrariness in evidence collection, formality of cross-examination and subjective tendency in certification. Therefore, it is urgent to clarify its legal status, and on this basis, build evidence rules that conform to the characteristics and application status of facial recognition evidence in China, so as to better play its active role in criminal proceedings.

        This paper is mainly divided into four parts: the first part defines the basic concepts of face recognition technology and face recognition evidence, and further analyzes its formation mechanism and internal characteristics on this basis, so as to provide a theoretical basis for clarifying its practical manifestations. In the second part, through the research on criminal cases in which facial recognition evidence is used as the basis for verdicts in the China Judgment Documents Network, the specific application status of it in criminal proceedings is introduced in detail from an empirical perspective, and based on the actual practice of criminal justice, the dilemmas and risks it faces in its application are explored, so as to provide a realistic basis for correctly regulating the use of facial recognition evidence in criminal cases and better exerting its probative value for the facts of the case. The third part is based on the practical advantages of the United States in face recognition technology and its deeper research theory on face recognition evidence, selects the United States as the extraterritorial research object, investigates the practice status of its application of face recognition evidence, and studies and sorts out the relevant regulatory paths for introducing face recognition evidence into criminal trials, and discusses them from the perspectives of restricting investigation and evidence collection, strictly cross-examining evidence in court, and carefully reviewing admissibility, in order to draw on its spiritual core and explore a regulatory path suitable for China's national conditions. The fourth part, in view of the practical difficulties existing in the application of facial recognition evidence in criminal proceedings, is based on China's criminal justice practice, and on the basis of dialectical reference to extraterritorial regulatory experience, suggestions are made for the construction of rules for facial recognition evidence in China. First, in order to solve the problem of its questioned evidentiary capacity due to unclear evidence attributes, it is necessary to reasonably locate facial recognition evidence in law; Secondly, in view of the different waysin which practical departments use facial recognition evidence in practice, we must construct corresponding evidence rules from the perspective of evidence collection, cross-examination and certification to solve their application problems