A soberania do tribunal do júri diante da revisão criminal

• Autor(a) principal: Cardoso, Angela Maria Fernandes
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Universitário da Ânima (RUNA)
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.animaeducacao.com.br/handle/ANIMA/5403
• topic: Tribunal do Júri; Revisão Criminal; Soberania dos veredictos

OBJECTIVE: The general objective of this paper is to analyze the Institute of the Court of Justice, or the principle of the sovereignty of verdicts, which must be adopted without prejudice to the principle of article 5, XXXVIII of the Federal Constitution of 1988. METHOD: The method used is the deductive; as for the approach, the research is qualitative; in relation to the depth of the study, exploratory research was used; on data collection procedures, bibliographic and documentary research was used, based on legal doctrines, jurisprudence and scientific articles. RESULTS: With the present research, it was found that the majority doctrinal positioning is that the criminal review action can be proposed due to a sentence handed down in the Jury Court, therefore, it can occur to the defendant's acquittal or even the reduction of the penalty and all this without violating the constitutional principle of the sovereignty of verdicts, because the principle of freedom will prevail in these cases. On the other hand, we have the analysis of some jurisprudence from the Court of Justice of the State of Santa Catarina, which, as demonstrated, has respected the principle of the sovereignty of verdicts in its decisions regarding the action of criminal review. However, according to the jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) that gave rise to the present work, it is admitted that the rescinding judgment and the rescissory judgment are exercised, in this way, the court may absolve or alter the sentence handed down by the Jury Court, fully applying article 626 of the Criminal Procedure Code. With all the doctrinal and jurisprudential debate on the criminal review to be applied in the judgment of the Jury Court, the majority that accept this applicability is majority, where, if the convict's innocenceisproperlyevidenced, the original judgment of the criminal review actioncanrescindthejury'scondemnatory sentence, and in its place, issue a new decision, in cludingan absolute. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that, despite the majority of the majority in favor of the application of the criminal review action in the sentences coming from the Jury Court, after the completion of the present work, it isunders tood that the constitutional principle of the sovereignty of the verdicts is “the soul of the Jury Tribunal” (NUCCI, 2013, p. 421). Thus, it is not possible for a judge to change the decision of the Sentencing Council, only in case of any judicial error is it possible to annul the first trial and cary out a second trial in plenary, and in the same manner as the procedure alreadyoccurred, which will not hurt the principle of the sovereignty of verdicts. Keywords: Court of Jury. Sovereignty of verdicts. Criminal Review.