O principio da soberania dos veredictos face à recorribilidade na hipótese de decisão manifestamente contrária à prova dos autos no tribunal do júri
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2024-07-09
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Ribas, Thamyres Cardoso
Orientador
Barbosa, Tatiana Trommer
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
O presente estudo objetiva apresentar a complexidade em se encontrar equilíbrio entre a garantia da interposição do recurso de apelação na hipótese de decisão manifestamente contrária à prova dos autos e o princípio da soberania dos veredictos. Parte-se da premissa de que a recorribilidade das decisões é algo que deve ser preservado em nosso ordenamento jurídico, ainda que tal leve a se defrontar com a instituição do Tribunal do Júri estabelecida na Constituição como cláusula pétrea. A presente pesquisa analisa se o princípio da soberania dos veredictos deve ser absoluto e questiona se há possíveis prejuízos em enxergá-lo desta forma. O Supremo Tribunal Federal em julgamento referente ao HC nº 178.777 de Minas Gerais, decidiu pela preservação da soberania do júri mesmo diante da decisão dos jurados terem sido manifestamente contrária a prova dos autos. No caso em exame, a decisão dos jurados determinou a absolvição do acusado e, foi carente de fundamentação, com base em quesito genérico colocou nos diante de uma situação que pode levar a um cerceamento da acusação, mesmo quando a lei postula por cabível a interposição do recurso. Além disso, não se deve ignorar de que a própria Constituição em seu art. 93, IX exige publicidade e fundamentação das decisões. Busca-se então no presente questionar se o rito do júri necessita ser modificado e se existe prejuízo a outros princípios e garantias constitucionais no impedimento trazido a acusação de ter o provimento deu seu recurso com vista a um novo julgamento. Iremos analisar o júri e o seu rito e abordar as colisões de princípios vigente do ordenamento jurídico brasileiro
The present study aims to present the complexity of finding a balance between guaranteeing the filing of an appeal in the event of a decision manifestly contrary to the evidence in the case and the principie of sovereignty of verdicts. lt is based on the premise that the appealability of decisions is something that must be preserved in our legal system, even if this leads to conflict with the institution of the Jury Court established in the Constitution as a permanent clause. This research analyzes whether the principie of sovereignty of verdicts should be absolute and questions whether there are possible harms in seeing it this way. The Federal Supreme Court, in a judgment regarding HC No. 178,777 of Minas Gerais, decided to preserve the sovereignty of the jury even though the jury's decision was manifestly contrary to the evidence in the case. ln the case under examination, the jury's decision determined the acquittal of the accused and, it was lacking in substantiation, based on a generic question, placed us before a situation that could lead to a restriction of the accusation, even when the law postulates that it is appropriate to filing of the appeal. Furthermore, it should not be ignored that the Constitution itself in its art. 93, IX requires publicity and reasons for decisions. The present aim is to question whether the jury procedure needs to be modified and whether there is harm to other constitutional principies and guarantees in the impediment brought to the prosecution from having its appeal granted with a view to a new triai. We will analyze the jury and its procedure and address the collisions between the current principies of the Brazilian legal system.
The present study aims to present the complexity of finding a balance between guaranteeing the filing of an appeal in the event of a decision manifestly contrary to the evidence in the case and the principie of sovereignty of verdicts. lt is based on the premise that the appealability of decisions is something that must be preserved in our legal system, even if this leads to conflict with the institution of the Jury Court established in the Constitution as a permanent clause. This research analyzes whether the principie of sovereignty of verdicts should be absolute and questions whether there are possible harms in seeing it this way. The Federal Supreme Court, in a judgment regarding HC No. 178,777 of Minas Gerais, decided to preserve the sovereignty of the jury even though the jury's decision was manifestly contrary to the evidence in the case. ln the case under examination, the jury's decision determined the acquittal of the accused and, it was lacking in substantiation, based on a generic question, placed us before a situation that could lead to a restriction of the accusation, even when the law postulates that it is appropriate to filing of the appeal. Furthermore, it should not be ignored that the Constitution itself in its art. 93, IX requires publicity and reasons for decisions. The present aim is to question whether the jury procedure needs to be modified and whether there is harm to other constitutional principies and guarantees in the impediment brought to the prosecution from having its appeal granted with a view to a new triai. We will analyze the jury and its procedure and address the collisions between the current principies of the Brazilian legal system.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Tribunal do júri , Princípio da soberania , Recuras , Constituição , HC nº 178.777-MG , Jury court , Principie of sovereignty , Resources , Constitution