Abstract
In October 2019, the Supreme Court decided, by majority of votes, that the informant must manifest later and successively to the informed person, in compliance with the adversary system and the due process. The Supreme Court chose, however, to modulate the effects of this nullity decree regarding past proceedings that did not observe the referred procedure. In this context, based on the deductive and dialectical methods of research, one seeks to analyze the theory of nullities in criminal procedural law, in order to safeguard due criminal proceedings. It also analyzes the institute of plea agreement and the role played by the informer in the course of the procedural march. Finally, based on the conclusions obtained, one aims to analyze the (in) correctness of what was decided by the Supreme Court, proposing, then, a compatible solution with the constitutional values protected by the nullity system.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Revista Digital Constituição e Garantia de Direitos
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
