{"id":730911,"date":"2026-04-28T13:27:47","date_gmt":"2026-04-28T11:27:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/"},"modified":"2026-04-28T13:27:47","modified_gmt":"2026-04-28T11:27:47","slug":"acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/","title":{"rendered":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Relator: HELENA MONIZ. I ? O recorrente entende que foi violada a garantia de processo equitativo consagrada no art. 20.?, n.? 4, do CRP e no art. 6.? da Conven??o Europeia dos Direitos Humanos (CEDH), por o crime de viol?ncia dom?stica ter sido julgado sob a forma de processo sumar?ssimo, por?m, a garantia de um processo equitativo, por si s?, n?o se integra em nenhuma das condi??es de admissibilidade do recurso de revis?o, expressamente previstas de forma taxativa no art. 449.?, n.? 1, do CPP. II — Sabendo que a aplica??o de uma pena de substitui??o da pena de pris?o, com regime de prova e a aplica??o de deveres, ou a aplica??o de uma pena acess?ria integram o momento da determina??o da pena e, portanto, a medida concreta da san??o aplicada, n?o poder?, segundo a jurisprud?ncia deste Supremo Tribunal de Justi?a, este constituir o ?nico motivo para a revis?o da decis?o (cf. art. 449.?, n.? 3, do CPP). III — N?o s? os ?novos? elementos n?o apagam as agress?es verbais e a agress?o f?sica da arguida ao aqui ofendido, mas tamb?m n?o podem ser considerados como elementos determinantes para uma revis?o da senten?a, porque se trata de factos objetivamente supervenientes.<\/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: HELENA MONIZ. I ? O recorrente entende que foi violada a garantia de processo equitativo consagrada no art. 20.?, n.? 4, do CRP e no art. 6.? da Conven??o Europeia dos Direitos Humanos (CEDH), por o crime de viol?ncia dom?stica ter sido julgado sob a forma de processo sumar?ssimo, por?m, a garantia de um processo equitativo, por si s?, n?o se integra em nenhuma das condi??es de admissibilidade do recurso de revis?o, expressamente previstas de forma taxativa no art. 449.?, n.? 1, do CPP. II — Sabendo que a aplica??o de uma pena de substitui??o da pena de pris?o, com regime de prova e a aplica??o de deveres, ou a aplica??o de uma pena acess?ria integram o momento da determina??o da pena e, portanto, a medida concreta da san??o aplicada, n?o poder?, segundo a jurisprud?ncia deste Supremo Tribunal de Justi?a, este constituir o ?nico motivo para a revis?o da decis?o (cf. art. 449.?, n.? 3, do CPP). III — N?o s? os ?novos? elementos n?o apagam as agress?es verbais e a agress?o f?sica da arguida ao aqui ofendido, mas tamb?m n?o podem ser considerados como elementos determinantes para uma revis?o da senten?a, porque se trata de factos objetivamente supervenientes.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7762],"kji_court":[7763],"kji_chamber":[7955],"kji_year":[41198],"kji_subject":[7632],"kji_keyword":[7772,7774,7771,7773,7636],"kji_language":[7770],"class_list":["post-730911","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-portugal","kji_court-supremo-tribunal-de-justica","kji_chamber-5-seco","kji_year-41198","kji_subject-penal","kji_keyword-acordao","kji_keyword-justica","kji_keyword-processo","kji_keyword-supremo","kji_keyword-tribunal","kji_language-pt"],"yoast_head":"\nAc\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22 - 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-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/\" \/>\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 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Relator: HELENA MONIZ. I ? O recorrente entende que foi violada a garantia de processo equitativo consagrada no art. 20.?, n.? 4, do CRP e no art. 6.? da Conven??o Europeia dos Direitos Humanos (CEDH), por o crime de viol?ncia dom?stica ter sido julgado sob a forma de processo sumar?ssimo, por?m, a garantia de um processo equitativo, por si s?, n?o se integra em nenhuma das condi??es de admissibilidade do recurso de revis?o, expressamente previstas de forma taxativa no art. 449.?, n.? 1, do CPP. II - Sabendo que a aplica??o de uma pena de substitui??o da pena de pris?o, com regime de prova e a aplica??o de deveres, ou a aplica??o de uma pena acess?ria integram o momento da determina??o da pena e, portanto, a medida concreta da san??o aplicada, n?o poder?, segundo a jurisprud?ncia deste Supremo Tribunal de Justi?a, este constituir o ?nico motivo para a revis?o da decis?o (cf. art. 449.?, n.? 3, do CPP). III - N?o s? os ?novos? elementos n?o apagam as agress?es verbais e a agress?o f?sica da arguida ao aqui ofendido, mas tamb?m n?o podem ser considerados como elementos determinantes para uma revis?o da senten?a, porque se trata de factos objetivamente supervenientes.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/\" \/>\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-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-28T11:27:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ru-RU\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/ru\\\/jurisprudences\\\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\\\/#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 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22\"}]},{\"@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 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22 - 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-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/","og_locale":"ru_RU","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22","og_description":"Relator: HELENA MONIZ. I ? O recorrente entende que foi violada a garantia de processo equitativo consagrada no art. 20.?, n.? 4, do CRP e no art. 6.? da Conven??o Europeia dos Direitos Humanos (CEDH), por o crime de viol?ncia dom?stica ter sido julgado sob a forma de processo sumar?ssimo, por?m, a garantia de um processo equitativo, por si s?, n?o se integra em nenhuma das condi??es de admissibilidade do recurso de revis?o, expressamente previstas de forma taxativa no art. 449.?, n.? 1, do CPP. II - Sabendo que a aplica??o de uma pena de substitui??o da pena de pris?o, com regime de prova e a aplica??o de deveres, ou a aplica??o de uma pena acess?ria integram o momento da determina??o da pena e, portanto, a medida concreta da san??o aplicada, n?o poder?, segundo a jurisprud?ncia deste Supremo Tribunal de Justi?a, este constituir o ?nico motivo para a revis?o da decis?o (cf. art. 449.?, n.? 3, do CPP). III - N?o s? os ?novos? elementos n?o apagam as agress?es verbais e a agress?o f?sica da arguida ao aqui ofendido, mas tamb?m n?o podem ser considerados como elementos determinantes para uma revis?o da senten?a, porque se trata de factos objetivamente supervenientes.","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/","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-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/","name":"Ac\u00f3rd\u00e3o Supremo Tribunal de Justi\u00e7a \u2013 Processo 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22 - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-28T11:27:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ru-RU","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/jurisprudences\/acordao-supremo-tribunal-de-justica-processo-582-16-5pfcsc-b-s1-2020-10-22\/#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 582.16.5PFCSC-B.S1 \u2013 2020-10-22"}]},{"@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\/730911","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=730911"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=730911"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/ru\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=730911"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}