刘涌，辽宁省沈阳市人。自1995年起，刘涌的犯罪行为开始呈现出黑社会性质组织犯罪的特征。2000年7月11日刘涌被沈阳市公安局刑事拘留，同年8月10日经沈阳市人民检察院批准逮捕。2002年4月，辽宁省铁岭市中级人民法院以组织、领导黑社会性质组织罪、故意伤害罪、非法经营罪、故意毁坏财物罪、行贿罪、妨碍公务罪、非法持有枪支罪等多项罪名一审判处刘涌死刑立即执行。刘涌上诉。2003年8月辽宁省高级人民法院改判刘涌死刑，缓期两年执行。2003年12月22日，最高人民法院再审法庭判处刘涌死刑，立即执行。本文以刘涌黑社会性质犯罪案为例，从该案引发的诸多法律问题中选取影响及争议较大的问题加以法理分析。本文正文分为五个部分，在第一部分，对刘涌黑社会性质组织犯罪一案的基本案情作了大致的介绍和归纳，并在这一过程中选取了值得探讨的四个问题，作为下文研讨的重点。在第二、三、四、五部分，围绕在第一部分归纳的四个问题进行了具体展开，分别探讨了：“黑社会性质组织犯罪与‘保护伞’的关系”、“死刑案件中的刑讯逼供问题”、“民意对死刑适用的影响”、“专家法律意见书的性质、作用及发展方向”四个问题。第一，寻求“保护伞”的庇护是黑社会性质组织发展到一定阶段后一个共有的特点。而我国当前的法律、法规中将“保护伞”排除在认定黑社会性质组织的条件之外。这样的规定虽然符合我国当前打击黑社会性质组织犯罪“打早打小、露头就打”的性质政策。但是忽视了“保护伞”在黑社会性质组织犯罪中的重大作用以及二者勾结的巨大社会危害性。“保护伞”应是黑社会性质组织的特征之一。截断黑社会性质组织与保护伞的联系是打击黑社会性质组织犯罪和减少腐败的有效方式。第二，刑讯逼供以及其他非法取证手段已为我国立法明文禁止，但是在我国司法实践中仍然屡见不鲜。刑讯逼供所得非法证据，应予以排除其证明力。而非法证据的衍生证据的证明力在我国现阶段打击犯罪的要求下，应予以保留。司法机关在执法中应严格依据法律所规定的程序，不能为了追求实体真实，而忽视程序正义。只有结合程序正义和实体正义才能实现法律所要求的正义。第三，民意对于死刑适用的影响主要体现在对于某一案件是否应判处死刑和如何废除死刑两方面。死刑个案的审理应严格以事实为依据，以法律为准绳，不应受到民愤和民情的影响。在我国废除死刑的进程中，应考虑到民众的接受能力和看法，首先应在司法实践中严格限制死刑，并逐渐减少刑法中的死刑罪名，而后不适用死刑，最终实现废除死刑。第四，专家法律意见书是我国当前法制不健全、法官素质不高的背景下产生的。尽管专家出具法律意见书招致了诸多质疑，但是在我国现阶段的国情下，专家法律意见书的积极作用是主要的。为了更好的运用专家法律意见书，使其发挥更好的作用，可以借鉴国外“法庭之友”制度，建立系统的专家出具法律意见的制度。

Liu Yong, Shenyang citizen. Liu’s crime started showing underworld organizations characteristics since 1995. Liu was detention on July.11.2001, and was arrested on Aug.11 the same year. Liu Yong was sentenced to death by Liaoning Province Tieling city intermediate people's court. After Liu appealed to higher court, the Liaoning Province Higher People's Court declared Liu 2 years’ probation death. On Dec.22.2003, The Supreme People's Court condemned Liu Yong immediate execution death penalty. The paper uses Liu Yong’ criminal case as an example to clarify some debatable issues.This paper consists 5 parts. In the first part is the introduction of Liu’s case and find 4 debatable points to discuss in the following parts of the paper. The issues are “relationship between underworld organization and the protective umbrella”, “the use of expert prospectus in criminal trial”, “the extorting a confession by torture in death cases” and “public opinion in the revision of death penalty”First, seeking for shelter form protective umbrella is the characteristic of underworld organizations. But protective umbrella is not defined as a main characteristic of underworld organization in China’s law and regulation. This kind of prescription neglected the function of the protective umbrella in underworld organization crime and the great social harmfulness. Protective umbrella should be the main factor in cognizance the underworld organization. Truncate the connection of the underworld organization and the protective umbrella is a good way to attack organized crime and to reduce corruption.Secondly, public opinion affects the usage of death penalty in two ways, one way is it affect the single death case, and the other is it affect the revision of death penalty. In the case trail, judge should not take public opinion as a factor in sentencing, but when come to the revision of death penalty, public opinion can be a factor but still not the decisive one. In the process of abolishing death penalty in our country, we should have following stage: strictly limited the use of death penalty, reduce the death penalty in criminal law, stop sentence death and finally abolish the death penalty. Thirdly, extorting a confession by torture is banned by law, but the police never stopped using it to get the oral evidence. According to the principle pf ruling out illegal testimony, the illegal evidence should not be used in conviction and discretion of punishment. But if the police use the illegal evidence as a trace and find other evidence, this kind of evidence should be useable in our country now. The judicial authority should consider procedure as important as the truth. Justice is the combination of truth and procedure.Last, the use of expert prospectus in criminal trail is the result of our social condition: The imperfect legal system and the disqualification of judges. Although the expert prospectus received many condemnations, it has more advantages than disadvantage in our country now. In order to improve the use of expert prospectus, we can introduce “the friend of the court” into our legal system and establish the system of expert prospectus.