Issues

EXPERT EVALUATION: AUXILLIARY ELEMENT IN THE FOUNDATION OF SPECIAL JUSTICE DECISIONS

How to cite: Souza EHA, Cardoso MSO, Girão IM, Souza EH, Haeffner JC. Laudo Pericial: Elemento Auxiliar na Fundamentação das Decisões junto a Justiça Especial. Persp Med Legal Perícia Med. 2017; 2(1)

https://dx.doi.org/10.47005/020102
→ You are reading an abstract. Please click here and choose language to access the full article translated by Google.

The authors declares that there is no conflict of interest.

LAUDO PERICIAL: ELEMENTO AUXILIAR NA FUNDAMENTAÇÃO DAS DECISÕES JUNTO A JUSTIÇA ESPECIAL

 

 

Eliane Helena Alvim de Souza (1)

Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/1844576207075293 – ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7573-1308

Maria do Socorro Orestes Cardoso (1)

Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/0513062107027471 – ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9866-0899

Ivana Maria Girão (2)

Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3155654172355927

Elaine Helena Alvim de Souza (2)

Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/2296017098858344

João Carlos Haeffner (2)

Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/2773422347928619 – ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3926-8672

(1) Faculdade de Odontologia de Pernambuco (FOP), Recife-PE. (Main Author)

(2) Universidade de Pernambuco (UPE), Recife-PE. (Main Author)

 

E-mail: hffjoao@gmail.com

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

In the Brazilian legal process the prove can be expressed in an expert testimony manifested by forensic report. In Judiciary organization there is the Special Justice subdivided in three metiers of which the National Military Justice – JMU forms one metier. The process in this special area obeys the Military Criminal Procedure Code – CPPM which contains in one chapter about prove acts. The present study aims to diminish the inexistence of a referential regarding the expert testimony in the legal process in the one Special Justice metier, the JMU. The study is presented as a descriptive, transversal and documentary. Following the bioethical regulations a sample of 136 legal process were established that should contain expert testimony. In results the defendants 85% were male and 59.8% were soldiers. The Army was present 68.4% and the number of a one defendant involved in each legal process occurred in 57.3%. The expert testimony was cited and mentioned in the judge decision sentenced in 75%. In the Brazilian Special Justice the expert testimony exposes relevance as a technical and scientific part mentioned in the sentencing.

Key-words: expert testimony, judicial decisions, justice administration system, legal process.

Please click here for the full article in portuguese.

Bibliographical references

 

  1. Decreto – Lei Nº 1.002, de 21 de outubro de 1969 – Código de Processo Penal Militar. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União, 21 de outubro de 1969. [cited 02 mai 2015] http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/decreto-lei/Del1002.htm
  2. Gonçalves MVR. Novo Curso de Direito Processual Civil, volume 1: teoria geral e processo de conhecimento (primeira parte).7.ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2010.
  3. Reis AB. Metodologia Científica em Perícia Criminal. Campinas: Millennium Editora, 2011. p.213-234.
  4. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil: Texto promulgado de 05 de outubro de 1988. Brasília: Senado Federal, 2013. p 20-25. [cited 20 abr 2015] http://www.senado.gov.br/legislacao/const/con1988/con1988_05.10.1988/con1988.pdf
  5. Poder Judiciário. Superior Tribunal Militar. Cartilha institucional da Justiça Militar da União. Brasília: Superior Tribunal Militar, 2013b. 37 p.
  6. Hoertel M. CPM e CPPM – Que códigos são esses? STM em Revista. v.2, n.3, p. 12-15, jul-dez 2006
  7. Ribeiro, Fernando José Armando. Justiça Militar, Escabinato e Acesso à Justiça Justa.AMAGIS JURÍDICA. v. 5, n. 9, p. 89, jul-dez 2013.
  8. Superior tribunal militar (STM). Participação feminina aumenta nas Forças Armadas. Disponível em:<http://www.stm.jus.br/informacao/agencia-de-noticias/item/3963-participacao-feminina-cresce-nas-forcas-armadas. Acesso em: 16/10/2016.
  9. Conselho Nacional de Justiça. Código de Ética da Magistratura Nacional. Brasília: Superior Tribunal Militar, 2009, p 17.

Tags: