Código de Processo Penal Comentado | Flavio Meirelles Medeiros

Article 225 CPP – Early Testimony.

Contribua com a manutenção deste site, faça um pix para [email protected].

Art. 225. If any witness has to be absent, or, due to  illness or old age, inspire fear that at the time of the criminal investigation he no longer exists, the judge may, ex officio or at the request of either party, take the deposition.

Early Testimony

Advance production of proof:  In some circumstances, such as illness or travel, it is necessary to produce proof  ad perpetuam rei memoriam (for the perpetual memory of the fact). The anticipated production of evidence aiming at instructing a criminal investigation cannot be determined ex officio by the judge. It is necessary that there be a request from the party, as this article was partially revoked, given that article 3-A , introduced into the system by Law n. 13,964/2019, prohibits the judge from substituting the evidentiary performance of the prosecution body . As the evidentiary performance of the prosecution(there is no accusatory action on the part of the Public Prosecution Service before starting the process – do not confuse investigative action with accusatory action) it only happens once the process is started through a complaint, this prohibition concerns the procedural instruction, and not only the investigative phase. The anticipated production of evidence is only justifiable if there is a demonstration of urgency, which only happens if there is a risk of the evidence being lost. It is an exceptional measure. The decision must be reasoned. Once it is decided to carry out the anticipated production of evidence, the parties must be summoned to accompany it.

Summons by public notice and anticipated production of evidence:  According to the provisions of  article 366 ,  if the accused, summoned by public notice, does not appear or appoint a lawyer, the process and the course of the statute of limitations will be suspended, and the judge may determine the anticipated production of the evidence considered urgent and, if applicable, order preventive detention, pursuant to the provisions of  article 312 . Precedent 455 of the STJ provides  : “The decision that determines the anticipated production of evidence based on article 366 of the CPP must be concretely reasoned, not justifying it solely by the mere passage of time”.

Fim

Contribua com seu comentário

O seu endereço de e-mail não será publicado. Campos obrigatórios são marcados com *

Summary