Conviction and imprisonment in intentional crimes regardless of final disposal of the criminal judgment

Abstract

The Criminal Code (Decree-Law 2.848, of December 7, 1940, as worded by Law 7.209, of July 11, 1984) provides that:
Art. 18 - It is said the crime:
Intentional crime
I – intentional, when the author wanted the result or assumed the risk of producing it;
Culpable crime
II – culpable, when the agent gave cause to the result by imprudence, negligence or malpractice.
[...]
In turn, item LVII of article 5 of the Federal Constitution provides that: “LVII – no one shall be held guilty until the final judgment is passed”.

From this constitucional norm, the expression “guilty” has been considered by some lawyers as a generic and not specific term.

On the other hand, in many administrative law congresses, the late minister Seabra Fagundes taught about the correct interpretation of an expression contemplated in the constitutional text, but that does not carry its meaning: one must take the meaning of the referred expression that is used in the layman’s language (usually provided in dictionaries).

Hence we conclude, ipso facto, that, if the expression has a specific meaning in positive law, generally in infraconstitutional legislation, we are obliged to use that legal meaning, instead of a generic and common meaning.