ABSTRACT:
The present research has as objective the study of the judicial decisions that are rendered by the criminal courts, as well as the judgments handed down in judgment by appellate groups of the Courts of Justice of the Brazilian States, when these bodies are facing the judgments of concrete cases that involve crimes of robbery and murder. Because both offenses have a fine line in their investigation, the requirements / elements that are taken into account for the disqualification of one crime from another, which are mainly the evidence that is collected during the investigative phases, have also been studied. circumstances that led to the consummation of the crime, and also the procedural institutes known as “emendatio libelli” and “mutatio libelli”, which allow judges and judges to give a legal definition to the specific case, different from that imputed in the initial accusation or through the which the individual came to suffer a criminal conviction. Therefore, the deductive method was used to carry out bibliographic researches that provided support for the analysis and response of the problem involved. It is noteworthy that, there are countless judges in which they demonstrate the disqualification of the conduct of robbery for homicide, occurring precisely by the fine line existing between both illicit, bringing certain difficulties for the judges to say the law, given the complexity that the cases offer. In order for the present work to be exposed, the problem of how to declassify one conduct by another was raised, given the union of crimes of theft plus homicide, which constitute consummate robbery, when in practice, such illicit acts have a similarity, requiring the exposition that the magistrates must pay greater attention to the facts that are submitted to the judgments, with their respective elements gathered, so that they can give the proper definition about the correct classification of the case.
Keywords: Judicial decisions; sentences; judgments; declassification of robbery for homicide; fine line; mutatio libelli; emendatio libelli.
REFERÊNCIAS:
CAPEZ, Fernando. Curso de Direito Penal, volume 1: parte geral (arts. 1° a 120). – 13ª. ed. – São Paulo: Saraiva, 2009.
MASSON, Cleber Rogério. Direito Penal Esquematizado – Parte Geral. – 3ª ed. Ver., atual e ampl- Rio de Janeiro: Forense; São Paulo: Método, 2010.
SIGNIFICADOS. Disponível:<https://www.significados.com.br/fato-tipico/>. Acesso em: 18/11/2019.
TJ – RS – APL: 70076591429 RS, Relator: José Conrado Kurtz de Souza, Data de Julgamento: 24/05/2018, Sétima Câmara Criminal, Data de Publicação: 12/06/2018.
GRECO, Rogério. Curso de Direito Penal: parte geral. – 19. ed. – Niterói, RJ: Impetus, 2017.
TJ – ES – APL: 00043246520168080069 ES, Relator: Fernando Zardini Antonio, Data de Julgamento: 18/09/2019, Segunda Câmara Criminal, Data de Publicação: 23/09/2019.
MASSON, Cleber. Código Penal Comentado. 2. Ed. rev., atual e ampl – Rio de Janeiro: Forense; São Paulo: Método, 2014.
NUCCI, Guilherme de Souza. Manual de Direito Penal. - 10. Ed. ver., atual e ampl. – Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2014.
PRADO, Luis Regis. Tratado de Direito Penal: parte especial – arts. 121 a 249 do CP. – 3. Ed. – Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2019.
CUNHA, Rogério Sanches. Manual de Direito Penal: parte especial (arts. 121 ao 361). – 9. ed. rev., ampl. e atual – Salvador: JusPODIVM, 2017.
LIMA, Renato Brasileiro de. Manual de Processo Penal. – 7. ed .rev., ampl. e atual. – Salvador: Ed. JusPODIVM, 2019.
TJ-PE - APL: 93630320088170480 PE 0009363-03.2008.8.17.0480, Relator: Nivaldo Mulatinho de Medeiros Correia Filho, Data de Julgamento: 19/09/2011, 3ª Câmara Criminal, Data de Publicação: 19/09/2011.
TJ-SP 00024847220168260407 SP 0002484-72.2016.8.26.0407, Relator: Paulo Rossi, Data de Julgamento: 08/08/2018, 12ª Câmara de Direito Criminal, Data de Publicação: 13/08/2018.
TJ-PE - APL: 4869392 PE, Relator: Democrito Ramos Reinaldo Filho, Data de Julgamento: 09/08/2018, 1ª Câmara Regional de Caruaru - 2ª Turma, Data de Publicação: 16/08/2018.
