Post by anik4400 on Feb 22, 2024 2:25:37 GMT -5
The crime had not been pardoned and would not even be prescribed, for example —, he approved the declaration of voluntary surrender. According to the minister, the Russian citizen committed common crimes, with no evidence that he was persecuted for racial, religious or political reasons. "There are no solid reasons that make plausible the hypothesis that the citizen complained of may be subjected to acts of persecution and/or discrimination due to race, religion, sex, nationality, language, social and/or personal condition, nor is there any concrete evidence foreseen that your legal situation will be aggravated by any of these elements." Minister Fachin also considered that investigations and investigative measures are underway in São Paulo, which prevents immediate extradition. "In light of this panorama, the extradition will be carried out after the investigations and processes relating to the criminal facts within the jurisdiction of Brazilian Justice have been completed.
He also added that, after extradition, Russia must observe all expected diplomatic commitments, such as limiting the maximum period of imprisonment to 30 years provided by law and not imposing the death penalty. In the decision, the minister maintained the arrest of the accused due to investigations still ongoing in São Paulo. With information from the STF advisory.The defendant, even in absentia, who appears at the pre-trial and trial hearing must be interrogated. This was the understanding of the 14th Chamber of Cri Vietnam WhatsApp Number minal Law of the Court of Justice of São Paulo when annulling an investigation hearing and trial of a man accused of triple homicide (a nasty reason, a resource that made the victim's defense and feminicide impossible). reproduction Reproduction Not hearing a defendant, even in default, is a restriction of defense, defines TJ-SP According to the records, the defendant attended the pre-trial and trial hearing, but was prevented from participating in the act by the court of origin on the grounds that he had tacitly renounced his right to presence and self-defense by declaring himself in default and being previously a fugitive from justice.
The TJ-SP, unanimously, recognized that there was a restriction on the defense and canceled the hearing. "The accused who is arrested, or who appears at the pre-trial and trial hearing, must be interrogated, as per article 185 of the Code of Criminal Procedure", stated the rapporteur, judge Miguel Marques e Silva. According to the judge, although the decree of default is correct, the natural consequence of the measure is the release of the accused from the act of personal summons. This fact, however, does not preclude the right to full defense, as well as the interrogation of the defendant if he appears in court. "It should be noted that the article in question does not prohibit the defendant in default from participating in the act of his judicial interrogation, which is a means of defense and represents the opportunity that the law gives him to present his version of the facts, even who chooses to remain silent", he added.
He also added that, after extradition, Russia must observe all expected diplomatic commitments, such as limiting the maximum period of imprisonment to 30 years provided by law and not imposing the death penalty. In the decision, the minister maintained the arrest of the accused due to investigations still ongoing in São Paulo. With information from the STF advisory.The defendant, even in absentia, who appears at the pre-trial and trial hearing must be interrogated. This was the understanding of the 14th Chamber of Cri Vietnam WhatsApp Number minal Law of the Court of Justice of São Paulo when annulling an investigation hearing and trial of a man accused of triple homicide (a nasty reason, a resource that made the victim's defense and feminicide impossible). reproduction Reproduction Not hearing a defendant, even in default, is a restriction of defense, defines TJ-SP According to the records, the defendant attended the pre-trial and trial hearing, but was prevented from participating in the act by the court of origin on the grounds that he had tacitly renounced his right to presence and self-defense by declaring himself in default and being previously a fugitive from justice.
The TJ-SP, unanimously, recognized that there was a restriction on the defense and canceled the hearing. "The accused who is arrested, or who appears at the pre-trial and trial hearing, must be interrogated, as per article 185 of the Code of Criminal Procedure", stated the rapporteur, judge Miguel Marques e Silva. According to the judge, although the decree of default is correct, the natural consequence of the measure is the release of the accused from the act of personal summons. This fact, however, does not preclude the right to full defense, as well as the interrogation of the defendant if he appears in court. "It should be noted that the article in question does not prohibit the defendant in default from participating in the act of his judicial interrogation, which is a means of defense and represents the opportunity that the law gives him to present his version of the facts, even who chooses to remain silent", he added.