Preventive booking does not require prior knowledge from the recipient

The First Committee of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) decided that preventive detention does not require prior knowledge of the recipient, bearing in mind the risk of frustration and urgency inherent in the procedure.

The decision was decided by Minister Alexandre de Moraes:

List

Summary: Court Appeal at the Migration Board. Criminal organization. preventive detention. appropriate motive. Annulment of the prison decree in the absence of prior notification to the defense. Absence of illegal restrictions. Review of real issues. Insufficient path. 1 – Ordinary cases showed the social risk of the patient, designated as a member of an articulated armed criminal organization, which appears to specialize in the offenses of drug trafficking and theft of goods, indicating, according to what was found, the usualness in criminal practice. These factors add to the patient’s distinct association with the criminal group, and reveal the necessity of their isolation to ensure public order, because if they remain free, they will be able to continue their criminal activity. 2- As the Court has already held, “the existence of a criminal organization imposes the necessity of boycotting or curtailing the performance of its members as a guarantee of public order, which constitutes an adequate and adequate precautionary basis for preventive detention” (HC 95.024, Minister for Foreign Relations CÁRMEN LÚCIA, first hearing, DJe 20/2/ 2009). 3- The jurisprudence of this Supreme Court is well established in the sense that preventive custody waives “the foreknowledge of the recipient, given the risk of frustration and urgency inherent in the measure” (HC 175710, Rapporteur: Marco Aurelio, First Team, DJe of 22/6/2020). 4. Examination of factual cases, in order to undermine the understanding of ordinary cases, would require a re-examination of the body of evidence, a procedure contrary to this procedural course. precedents. 5. Rejection of the preliminary appeal. (HC 207608 AgR, Rapporteur: ALEXANDRE DE MORAES, Team I, Judgment of 11-16-2021, Electronic Operation DJe-229 DIVULG 11-18-2021 PUBLIC 11-19-2021)

Read also

Syrians for Truth and Justice: House arrest is not permissible if exceptions are not proven

Want to be on top of all forensic science channel content?

follow us no Facebook social networking site no Instagram.

We provide daily content to update students, jurists and legal actors.