Legalidade “versus” jurisdicionalidade na execução penal? Ônus financeiro da monitoração eletrônica em decisões do TRF-4
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 16965620 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Thyerrí José Cruz Silva (0000-0001-7250-0790, Universidade Tiradentes, corresponding author), Sandra Regina Medeiros Oliveira (0000-0002-0221-7719, Universidade Tiradentes) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 10 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Publication date | 2024-03-27 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2359-3881 • E-ISSN: 2525-510X |
| Publisher | Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (PUBLISHER • BR) |
| DOI | 10.22197/rbdpp.v10i1.872 |
| OpenAlex | W4390225828 |
| Language | PT |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 2 |
Criminal execution is a state activity based on the principles of certain, strict and exhaustive legality and jurisdictionality, which is why the rights and duties of prisoners must always comply with legal provisions. Despite this, the Brazilian Regional Federal Court of the 4th Region (TRF-4) has been imposed on the monitored person the burden of bearing the expenses arising from electronic monitoring, a burden that is not supported by Brazilian legislation that deals with the subject. For this reason, it is necessary to question, as a research problem: are these TRF-4 decisions legally correct? In view of this, this article aims to critically analyze the decisions of the TRF-4 in this sense and the main arguments used, in order to verify whether they are legally correct or mistaken, due to the lack of a explicit legal provision in this regard, which, in fact, came to be recognized on several occasions by the Brazilian Superior Tribunal of Justice (STJ). The choice of TRF-4 is justified by the significant number of Court decisions in this regard, as well as by the fact that the other Federal Regional Courts do not have sentences with this content and intention. The theoretical framework uses productions related to criminal execution and its principles of legality and jurisdiction. The research concludes that the aforementioned decisional action of the TRF-4 is out of step with the principles of legality and jurisdictionality in criminal execution
Business · Criminal law · Criminal procedure · Economic Justice · Jurisdiction · Law and economics · Legal certainty · Legislation · Political science · Principle of legality · Sociology · Tribunal · Brazilian Legal Issues · Computer Science · Criminal Justice and Penology · Law · Public Health in Brazil
| Citations per year | 0.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2024 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |