The former president’s defense tries to annul his sentence of 27 years and 3 months in prison in the case of the coup plot; Attorney General of the Republic will have 20 days to respond
The minister, from the STF (Supreme Federal Court), opened a 20-day period for the PGR (Attorney General’s Office) to comment on the request for criminal review presented by the defense of former president Jair Bolsonaro to try to annul his conviction in the case of the coup plot. Read (PDF — 106 kB).
In an order signed this Wednesday (May 27, 2026), the judge stated that the “complexity of the feat”as it involves a former president of the Republic, justifies the extension of the deadline originally provided for by law.
According to the CPP (Criminal Procedure Code), the PGR would have 10 days to present an opinion on criminal reviews. Nunes, however, decided to extend the deadline to 20 days before analyzing Bolsonaro’s request.
“Given the complexity of the case, which involves the trial of the former President of the Republic, I believe it is necessary to extend the deadline for the Federal Public Ministry to demonstrate”wrote the rapporteur.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF CONVICTION
The criminal review is processed under number RvC (Criminal Review). The rapporteur is Nunes Marques and the reviewer is André Mendonça, both ministers appointed by the former president.
Bolsonaro’s defense calls for the annulment of Bolsonaro’s sentence to 27 years and 3 months in prison in the coup plot process. According to Lookthe lawyers also ask for the annulment of Mauro Cid’s plea bargain and the case being sent to the STF plenary.
Criminal review is an instrument used to try to overturn a definitive conviction. In Bolsonaro’s case, the defense maintains that there was a judicial error and questions aspects of the processing and judgment of the case.
UNDERSTAND THE CASE
Bolsonaro in the coup plot process by the 1st Panel of the STF. The defense tries to reverse the decision through criminal review, an autonomous action presented after the conviction.
In the petition, the lawyers allege that the defense did not have full access to evidence from the investigation and argue that the case should have been judged by the STF plenary, and not by one of the Court’s groups, according to the Look.
According to the Supreme Court’s internal regulations, the criminal review must be analyzed by the 2nd Classformed by Nunes Marques, André Mendonça, Gilmar Mendes, Dias Toffoli and Luiz Fux.
