APPLICATIONS, FOLLOWING THIS MODEL RECENT
Honorable Judge of the 6 th Criminal COUNTY OF CAPITAL
Case No. 0000/00
PAULISTA LEMON, already qualified in the above case it moves to Justice Public infrastructure signed by his attorney, comes to the presence of Your Excellency, timely, submit your
DEFENCE PRELIMINARY
According to article 55 of Law No. 11.343/06, for reasons of fact and of law set out below:
I - FACTS
The accused was arrested in flagrante delicto, on 00 October 2010, and terminated by penalties incurred in the situation dictates of Article 33, caput of Law 11,343 / 06 and Article 180 of the Penal Code.
According to the complaint, the accused was caught by military police while driving the vehicle for his own benefit brand Ford Model 'Fiesta' boards: GGG 0000, aware of its illicit origin and transported inside the car mentioned above with clear purposes of trade without authorization and in violation of the legal 182 plastic enclosures containing Cannabis Sativa and 54-pin plastics containing cocaine.
Consta, still, in the complaint that the large number and diversity of narcotic drugs and how they put up all the toxic, stupefying denote that were intended for delivery to third parties.
It appeared from all over the ground that:
said the militiamen who managed to hold the accused, including the soldier Marcolino Menosgrau he declined: "... on routine patrol was briefed by officials of the company Porto Seguro a vehicle Fiestança product theft and traffic around diligence was faced with the vehicle being given order Stop being that the suspect did not obey the order and has taken flight. The driver Fiestança speeding traffic and Envernada Street hit the rear of the car Fuscolino. Due to mechanical problems and his driver left the vehicle interior and undertakes escape on foot but was caught by the deponent. The detainee was identified as Paulista Lemon who was wanted for justice and that nothing of interest policeman was found with the same ... "And still the police:" ... The car belongs to Fiestança Mariana victim which is not recognized as being Paulista who stole her car and was apprehended in flagrante delicto in Article 180 of the CP . In the courtyard of the Police Unit under review by the trunk of Fiestança 182 shells were found in plastic substance containing greenish-shaped stones appearing in the case of marijuana and 54-pin plastic containing white powder substance seeming to treat cocaine. "
II - THE RIGHT
From the facts narrated above, it is not possible to state that the intent of the accused was make merchandise that has been awarded in the complaint, on the contrary, there were some drugs in that vehicle, in fact, Paul had just received the said vehicle in a matter of a friend, who had stolen the night before the victim Mariana Fernandes, and asked him to take the vehicle to his residence. Paulista, not wanting to contradict the friend, since he had already done various favors for him decided to take their order and was heading to go to his residence when the police made a sign to stop the vehicle. So much so Excellency. that the arrest of the accused took place exactly on the street where you live. Paulista Lemon disregarded the stop sign because he was a fugitive from justice and he knew he would be arrested just for being with a vehicle of dubious origin and never to be involved with trafficking, because it did not take any stupefying substance.
This statement is so concrete, because the police at the time of the approach and the minutes that passed at the scene opened the same doors, hood and trunk of the vehicle and rolled Fiestança throughout the interior and the door bags looking for anything that was not part of the vehicle accessories. This all took place even at the scene, and were witnessed by several people including the witnesses listed below.
If there was stupefying substance, these have been found at that time and the view of eyewitnesses, not only in the precinct, after the vehicle was driven to it. This is what was said by witnesses to police officers among them Marcolino and his fellow soldier in uniform who declined Heverson, or rather confirmed "ipsi literes" speech of his companion.
Porting is the case of rejection of the complaint for the crime capitulated in Article 33 of Law 11.343/06 only do so for the crime of Article 180 "caption of the Penal Code.
There was no significance in money from the accused. Moreover, if the accused was a drug dealer, certainly would be in possession of a large sum at the opportunity and not without a real pocket.
So unfounded assertion in the complaint, when he says that "the aim of merchandise and pass the toxin to third parties, by the condemned, is evident and will be tested during the investigation by reputable witnesses that the accused was not carrying nor led any stupefying substance.
We must remember that the two policemen who made the arrest, and subsequently reported to the police authority, said categorically that the drug only was found in the trunk of the vehicle already in the courtyard of a police station.
The context of evidence designed and ratified by the police on the complaint process by Renowned public prosecutor, is illusory, THERE, underpinned as it is doubtful only in declarations, one can not believe that the vehicle would not have been searched by police in location of the crime where there were several witnesses and only done in the courtyard of the station away from the eyes of onlookers. Who is this procedure?
The principle of non-culpability in the Constitution of the Republic and the principle of innocence set in international conventions give the Defendant safety procedures. The prosecution faces the burden of proving materiality and authorship delinquent with respect to merchandise.
There should be no reversal of the burden of evidence. The accused does not need to prove innocence as to the merchandise or possession of narcotics, because that just was not acting at the time of his arrest, but will prove by testimonials that this is the objective reality, what really happened that day.
Despite finding, through expert advice and term view and concern, the materiality of the crime of trafficking narcotic there but can not be attributed to the accused the author and an alleged conviction for trafficking, since the subjective certainty extracted from the oral test and limited the testimony of the officers later to be contradicted by witnesses during the discovery phase.
Based on the foregoing, it requires the rejection of the complaint by the crime defined in Article 33 of Law 11.343/06, subsisting only the crime defined in Article 180 "caption of the Criminal Code since, at any time the accused was in possession, or any substance brought with overwhelming love, come to protest the dismissal of the complaint is made in the reported initial part, as a measure of justice.
Protests prove the claim by all means of proof admitted in law.
With this defense, you see the list of witnesses to be subpoenaed by Your Excellency.
Valkyrie
RG:
End: - Capital
Vania
RG:
End: - Capital
Robert
RG:
End: - Capital
Terms under which
Calls acceptance.
São Paulo, January 6, 2011
0 comments:
Post a Comment