0
In a recent trial carried out by the Full Jurisdictional Court of the Court of Justice of the State of Acre (TJAC), the Judiciary consolidated an understanding that directly impacts investigations and trials on drug trafficking in the State. The decision, published in issue no. 7,965 of the Electronic Justice Gazette, establishes that the absence of physical seizure of drugs from the defendant is not, in itself, a reason for acquittal.
The Court understood that the materiality of the crime of trafficking can be proven by various means, such as telephone interceptions, digital evidence and connections with criminal groups that are in possession of the substance. The focus of the trial was the validation that the “subjective bond” (the connection between the individual and the criminal activity) is the central element for the configuration of the crime.
TJAC establishes thesis and authorizes conviction for trafficking even without direct seizure of drugs from the defendant/Photo: Reproduction
The judgment thesis established by the Full Court serves as a guide for future proceedings. Check out the excerpts from the official decision:
“2. The absence of direct seizure of narcotics from the defendant does not preclude conviction for drug trafficking, as long as there is sufficient proof of his connection with the criminal group responsible for storing the substance.”
“3. Recognition of the materiality of the trafficking crime can be based on various evidence, such as telephone interceptions, expertise in drugs seized from co-defendants and other elements that demonstrate the subjective link between those involved.”
By removing the requirement for immediate physical seizure of the defendant for sentencing, the TJAC seeks to combat the hierarchical structures of criminal organizations, where leaders or managers of trafficking logistics often do not maintain direct contact with the drug during police approaches, ensuring that justice reaches everyone involved in the trafficking chain.
O ContilNet interviewed criminal lawyer Wellington Silva to better understand the change in the legal environment.
Criminalist explains that the absence of seized drugs does not prevent conviction for trafficking/Photo: Reproduction
“What we are seeing, in fact, is the consolidation of an understanding that already comes strongly from the higher courts. Today, the pacified understanding is that there is no need to find the drug in the direct possession of the agent for the conviction to occur. The materiality of trafficking can be perfectly proven by other means”, he pointed out.
According to the lawyer, this jurisprudence significantly changes the way in which evidence is evaluated in court, favoring the set of evidence over single material evidence:
“The Court understands that the elements that indicate trafficking, such as inputs, production materials, storage locations, large amounts of money and telephone interceptions, are sufficient to characterize the trafficking trade.”
Silva also concludes that this update is essential to face the complexity of modern criminal networks:
“The message from the Judiciary is clear: criminal law has adapted to the reality of organized crime. Leaders and large suppliers rarely get their hands on drugs. Requiring physical arrest would guarantee their impunity. The decision reaffirms that complex investigations are enough for conviction and that appeals alleging only the lack of direct seizure will not prosper if there is other evidence.”
