Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
046215 AI generated

Portuguese court denies state forfeiture of property when spouse is innocent and accessory penalties lack preventive intent.

Case Number 046215
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Portugal (PT)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Justice partially granted the appeal regarding the forfeiture of an apartment purchased with drug trafficking proceeds. The defense argued the property belonged to an innocent spouse who did not participate in the crime, while the prosecution contended the funds originated from illegal activities. The court ruled that forfeiture cannot be declared against the state if the spouse is innocent and that accessory penalties do not always clearly serve preventive purposes.

Legislator headnote

Official

TRÁFICO DE ESTUPEFACIENTE PRODUTO DO CRIME PERDA DE COISA RELACIONADA COM O CRIME PERDA DE OBJECTO DE TERCEIRO RELACIONADO COM O CRIME IN DUBIO PRO REO COMPETÊNCIA DO SUPREMO TRIBUNAL DE JUSTIÇA PENA ACESSÓRIA PREVENÇÃO CRIMINAL

Keywords

AI generated
drug trafficking proceeds property forfeiture innocent spouse defense accessory penalties preventive intent Supreme Court jurisdiction criminal asset recovery

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Código Penal, Art. 63
Lei de Forfeição de Bens

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

[Nº CONVENCIONAL] JSTJ00022466

[Nº DO DOCUMENTO] SJ199403170462153

[PRIVACIDADE] 1

[PROCESSO NO TRIBUNAL RECURSO] 100/93

[TEXTO INTEGRAL] N

[TRIBUNAL RECURSO] T CR LISBOA

[URL] https://www.dgsi.pt/jstj.nsf/954f0ce6ad9dd8b980256b5f003fa814/7CD72E005E9FB235802568FC003AE1AF?OpenDocument

SUMÁRIO

I - Não pode declarar-se perdido a favor do Estado um imóvel pretensamente comprado com dinheiro proveniente do tráfico de estupefaciente, se ele também pertencer

à mulher do arguido e ela não tiver comparticipado na infracção.

II - No sistema do actual Código Penal, nem sempre está patente, quanto às penas acessórias, a ideia de prevenção.

III - A aplicação do princípio "in dubio pro reo" é estranha à competência do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça.