Post by account_disabled on Mar 6, 2024 23:09:35 GMT -5
Convicted of setting fire to their respective homes to defraud the insurance company former Acre state deputy Roberto Barros Filho and his son Roberto Barros Júnior failed to obtain Habeas Corpus at the Superior Court of Justice. The decision of the th Panel was unanimous. The insurance value was R$ million — the amount would be paid to each person.
In the case of Roberto Barros Filho's residence the compensation would be paid to his wife also accused of the crimes. Father and son were sentenced in the first instance to six years and six months in prison in an initial semiopen regime for the crimes of fire causing danger to the lives of others and embezzlement due to fraud to receive compensation.
The defendants appealed but the Acre Court of Justice upheld the sentence. As the state court denied the special appeal to the STJ the defense filed an interlocutory appeal which was not heard by the STJ.
In Habeas Corpus the defense of the two claimed the nullity BTC Number Data of the criminal action because the prosecution had been favored because some of the measures requested from the judge during the process were rejected. For the defense the crime of fire should be absorbed by that of fraud to receive insurance as this is the final crime.
The lawyer also stated that by decreeing preventive arrests the judge violated constitutional guarantees as well as the jurisdiction of the criminal execution court by including the defendants in the differentiated disciplinary regime in which the prisoner spends hours a day in an individual cell. including just two hours of sunbathing.
The case's rapporteur Minister Jorge Mussi said that there was no illegality in the ruling of the Acre court which considered the first degree decision wellfounded and correct with no new reasons for reexamining the accused as the defense wanted.
“The ruling that dismissed the patients’ appeal did not make any mention of such arguments especially because at no point in the criminal case in question did the defense raise them having maintained in their appeal only and solely the nullity of the case. for restriction of defense violation of due legal process and use of illicit evidence” considered the minister.
In the case of Roberto Barros Filho's residence the compensation would be paid to his wife also accused of the crimes. Father and son were sentenced in the first instance to six years and six months in prison in an initial semiopen regime for the crimes of fire causing danger to the lives of others and embezzlement due to fraud to receive compensation.
The defendants appealed but the Acre Court of Justice upheld the sentence. As the state court denied the special appeal to the STJ the defense filed an interlocutory appeal which was not heard by the STJ.
In Habeas Corpus the defense of the two claimed the nullity BTC Number Data of the criminal action because the prosecution had been favored because some of the measures requested from the judge during the process were rejected. For the defense the crime of fire should be absorbed by that of fraud to receive insurance as this is the final crime.
The lawyer also stated that by decreeing preventive arrests the judge violated constitutional guarantees as well as the jurisdiction of the criminal execution court by including the defendants in the differentiated disciplinary regime in which the prisoner spends hours a day in an individual cell. including just two hours of sunbathing.
The case's rapporteur Minister Jorge Mussi said that there was no illegality in the ruling of the Acre court which considered the first degree decision wellfounded and correct with no new reasons for reexamining the accused as the defense wanted.
“The ruling that dismissed the patients’ appeal did not make any mention of such arguments especially because at no point in the criminal case in question did the defense raise them having maintained in their appeal only and solely the nullity of the case. for restriction of defense violation of due legal process and use of illicit evidence” considered the minister.