A incidência do princípio da vedação reformatio in pejus indireta no âmbito das decisões do tribunal do júri.

Abstract

There is doubt the democratic value of the institution of the jury, guaranteed under the Constitution. For this reason, the programs offer various possibilities for scientific research necessary and productive. Thus, the present study has the core of the controversy affect to the incidence of the principle of indirect reformatio in pejus sealing within the decisions of the jury, bearing in mind the constitutional principle of sovereignty of the verdicts. In this bias, it is looked into the possibility of exasperation of the sentence imposed on retrial by the People's Court, annulled the trial once before in the face of the exclusive remedy defense. The general goal of this research is therefore to analyze the principle of indirect reformatio in pejus sealing, investigating the aspects of its admissibility in the grand jury proceedings, given the assumption that prints sovereignty to that institution. Regarding the methodology used, it is used the deductive method of approach, and as research methods, the legal exegesis, the systemic and also the empirical method. The research technique, in turn, is bibliographic. The analysis of the matter discussed, it must be admitted that the principle of indirect ne reformatio in pejus, despite the opinion of some in a different way, is mostly engaged in teaching and especially in jurisprudence from the patriotic courts. Regarding the application of this principle within the decisions of the jury, it is dominant in doctrine and jurisprudence, understanding that this principle will focus only on the assumption of identical verdicts, should not be ignored, because, in cases of separates decisions. However, we conclude that is gaining strength, especially after the recent Supreme Court decision, the understanding that the principle under discussion should be observed in any case, for the presiding judge of the jury, precisely prohibiting the reform for the worse due to the appeal filed by the defendant solely.