Intangible property, case study, seizure and experts
Made a sudden seizure and experts should conduct the investigation and prepare the corresponding technical report, answering the questions formulated by the plaintiffs, the Public Ministry and the judge. Not realizing expertise by decision of the experts after inspection, the expert report must be presented within three days after the end of diligence.
Ending the expertise, the experts will present their report (in a period of 03 days after the close of the proceedings) so that the judge may confirm.
The diligence applicant may challenge the report contrary to seizure (art. 527, sole paragraph, first part). The report being contested with due reason, the judge can not accept them keeping in whole or in part, the act of experts, or accept all or part of the challenge of reasons. In this case can have the arrest is effected (art. 527, sole paragraph) or understanding formally admissible report and disagreeing only the interpretation of experts, order only let there be omitted apprehension.
[...] However the provisional diligences have been requested by the prosecution agency, will run the general rule enshrined in the mentioned provision of Article 102, 3 of the Criminal Code. References - Mirabet, Julio Fabbrini, Criminal Law Manual, Special Party - Art 121-234 of the Penal Code, Volume 19th Edition, Publisher Atlas SA, São Paulo - Mirabet, Julio Fabbrini, Criminal Procedure, 13th Edition, São Paulo, Editora Atlas SA 2002 - Www.am.trf1.gov.br/biblioteca/DIREITO%20e%INTERNET/ - Http://www.secrel.com.br/jpoesia/ibarroso3.html - MAGALHÃES NORONHA, E. Course of criminal procedural law. São Paulo: Saraiva - MEADOW, Luiz Regis. Course Brazilian criminal law, Volume special part. São Paulo: Editora Revista dos Courts - CAPEZ, Fernando. Criminal proceedings course. [...]
[...] Intangible property: case study Expert report Made a sudden seizure and experts should conduct the investigation and prepare the corresponding technical report, answering the questions formulated by the plaintiffs, the Public Ministry and the judge. Not realizing expertise by decision of the experts after inspection, the expert report must be presented within three days after the end of diligence. Ending the expertise, the experts will present their report (in a period of 03 days after the close of the proceedings) so that the judge may confirm. [...]
[...] The decay of the abuse of law is governed by the same principles found in Article 105 of the Penal Code. You should also note that the victim can not file a complaint after 30 days of approval of the report regarding the preliminary diligence of search and seizure. And if there is prison in the act and the defendant are not set free, the thirty-day period is reduced to eight days (Code of Criminal Procedure, arts caput, and 530). [...]
[...] Therefore, if the persecutory activity of the prosecution organ depend on representation, he must wait for the offense to formulate because of the contrary, is unacceptable, not only the bringing of criminal proceedings public, but also the request for preliminary diligences. Interestingly, in the prosecution of crimes publishes the victim himself may require diligence of search and seizure, as you can notice in the text of Article 529, sole paragraph of the Criminal Procedure Code. When this happens the public prosecution becomes a subsidiary of private prosecution. [...]
[...] São Paulo: Saraiva - MARQUES, Jose Frederico. Elements of the Criminal Procedural Law, Volume ed, Publisher: Millennium, Campinas, 2002. [...]
using our reader.