{"id":677102,"date":"2026-04-25T02:04:03","date_gmt":"2026-04-25T00:04:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/"},"modified":"2026-04-25T02:04:03","modified_gmt":"2026-04-25T00:04:03","slug":"acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/","title":{"rendered":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Relator: ANT?NIO GAMA. I — Se foram valoradas na decis?o proferida em 1.? inst?ncia declara??es prestadas por um arguido em primeiro interrogat?rio, sem que na audi?ncia de julgamento tenham sido reproduzidas ou lidas e o ac?rd?o recorrido decidiu que essa prova n?o ? proibida, enquanto o ac?rd?o fundamento taxou-a de proibida, os ac?rd?os tratam da mesma quest?o de direito, s?o conflituantes pois afirmam solu??es opostas e incompat?veis a partir de id?ntica situa??o de facto. II — A circunst?ncia de no ac?rd?o recorrido estar em causa as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (art. 141.? do CPP), enquanto no ac?rd?o fundamento as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio n?o judicial de arguido detido, n?o obsta a que se verifique id?ntica situa??o de facto, se, em ambos os casos, o arguido foi ouvido com respeito das disposi??es aplic?veis relativas ao primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (arts. 141.?, 143.?, n.? 2, do CPP).<\/p>\n

\n

Sources officielles :<\/strong> consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n

Portails officiels portugais (DGSI \/ Tribunal Constitucional). Republication en metadata_only par prudence licencielle ; consulter la source officielle pour le texte authentique.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Relator: ANT?NIO GAMA. I — Se foram valoradas na decis?o proferida em 1.? inst?ncia declara??es prestadas por um arguido em primeiro interrogat?rio, sem que na audi?ncia de julgamento tenham sido reproduzidas ou lidas e o ac?rd?o recorrido decidiu que essa prova n?o ? proibida, enquanto o ac?rd?o fundamento taxou-a de proibida, os ac?rd?os tratam da mesma quest?o de direito, s?o conflituantes pois afirmam solu??es opostas e incompat?veis a partir de id?ntica situa??o de facto. II — A circunst?ncia de no ac?rd?o recorrido estar em causa as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (art. 141.? do CPP), enquanto no ac?rd?o fundamento as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio n?o judicial de arguido detido, n?o obsta a que se verifique id?ntica situa??o de facto, se, em ambos os casos, o arguido foi ouvido com respeito das disposi??es aplic?veis relativas ao primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (arts. 141.?, 143.?, n.? 2, do CPP).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7762],"kji_court":[7763],"kji_chamber":[7955],"kji_year":[36297],"kji_subject":[7612],"kji_keyword":[7772,27801,7771,7773,7636],"kji_language":[7770],"class_list":["post-677102","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-portugal","kji_court-supremo-tribunal-de-justica","kji_chamber-5-seco","kji_year-36297","kji_subject-fiscal","kji_keyword-acordao","kji_keyword-pboer","kji_keyword-processo","kji_keyword-supremo","kji_keyword-tribunal","kji_language-pt"],"yoast_head":"\nAc\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ru_RU\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Relator: ANT?NIO GAMA. I - Se foram valoradas na decis?o proferida em 1.? inst?ncia declara??es prestadas por um arguido em primeiro interrogat?rio, sem que na audi?ncia de julgamento tenham sido reproduzidas ou lidas e o ac?rd?o recorrido decidiu que essa prova n?o ? proibida, enquanto o ac?rd?o fundamento taxou-a de proibida, os ac?rd?os tratam da mesma quest?o de direito, s?o conflituantes pois afirmam solu??es opostas e incompat?veis a partir de id?ntica situa??o de facto. II - A circunst?ncia de no ac?rd?o recorrido estar em causa as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (art. 141.? do CPP), enquanto no ac?rd?o fundamento as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio n?o judicial de arguido detido, n?o obsta a que se verifique id?ntica situa??o de facto, se, em ambos os casos, o arguido foi ouvido com respeito das disposi??es aplic?veis relativas ao primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (arts. 141.?, 143.?, n.? 2, do CPP).\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\\\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-25T00:04:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\\\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02","og_description":"Relator: ANT?NIO GAMA. I - Se foram valoradas na decis?o proferida em 1.? inst?ncia declara??es prestadas por um arguido em primeiro interrogat?rio, sem que na audi?ncia de julgamento tenham sido reproduzidas ou lidas e o ac?rd?o recorrido decidiu que essa prova n?o ? proibida, enquanto o ac?rd?o fundamento taxou-a de proibida, os ac?rd?os tratam da mesma quest?o de direito, s?o conflituantes pois afirmam solu??es opostas e incompat?veis a partir de id?ntica situa??o de facto. II - A circunst?ncia de no ac?rd?o recorrido estar em causa as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (art. 141.? do CPP), enquanto no ac?rd?o fundamento as declara??es prestadas em primeiro interrogat?rio n?o judicial de arguido detido, n?o obsta a que se verifique id?ntica situa??o de facto, se, em ambos os casos, o arguido foi ouvido com respeito das disposi??es aplic?veis relativas ao primeiro interrogat?rio judicial de arguido detido (arts. 141.?, 143.?, n.? 2, do CPP).","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u041f\u0440\u0438\u043c\u0435\u0440\u043d\u043e\u0435 \u0432\u0440\u0435\u043c\u044f \u0434\u043b\u044f \u0447\u0442\u0435\u043d\u0438\u044f":"1 \u043c\u0438\u043d\u0443\u0442\u0430"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/","name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-25T00:04:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-660-19-9pboer-l1-a-s1-2021-12-02\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/avocats-en-droit-penal-a-paris-conseil-et-defense-strategique\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 660\/19.9PBOER.L1-A.S1 \u2013 2021-12-02"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"ru-RU"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ru-RU","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/677102","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=677102"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=677102"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=677102"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}