STF maintains the legality of GCM-SP’s actions in cases of trafficking

This Tuesday (2), the First Panel of the Federal Supreme Court (STF) upheld a decision by Minister Alexandre de Moraes that recognized the legality of the actions of the Metropolitan Civil Guard (GCM) of São Paulo in personal and home searches related to crimes of drug trafficking.

When judging the case individually, Moraes accepted an appeal presented by the Public Ministry of São Paulo (MP-SP) against a ruling by the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), which had considered GCM’s actions illegal.

In this Tuesday’s trial, Moraes’ understanding was followed by ministers Luiz Fux, Flávio Dino and Cármen Lúcia. The president of the First Panel, minister Cristiano Zanin, voted in the opposite direction.

Understand the case

During a routine patrol, GCM agents noticed that a man had dropped a bag he was carrying.

During the investigation, agents did not find drugs on the suspect, but the discarded bag contained narcotics packaged for sale. The suspect confessed that he kept more drugs in his house.

In the suspect’s home, agents found marijuana, skunk, cocaine, crack and thinner.

The quantity of material and the way it was packaged were compatible with the hypothesis of drug trafficking. The agents then arrested the man red-handed.

The arrest in the act was converted into preventive by the Court of Embu-Guaçu (SP).

The defense presented habeas corpus at the Court of Justice of the State of São Paulo (TJ-SP) maintaining that the GCM’s approach was illegal and requested his release, but was unsuccessful.

The Superior Court of Justice (STJ) then accepted the defense’s appeal and ordered the case to be suspended.

After the STJ’s decision, the Public Ministry of the State of São Paulo (MP-SP) appealed to the Supreme Court.

The defense

In a regulatory appeal, the defense claimed that metropolitan guards cannot carry out arrests and searches.

The defense also highlighted that the agents did not witness the sale or delivery of drugs nor did they see their client hiding or consuming drugs.

It was also alleged that there is no evidence that the suspect consented to the agents entering his home.

Understanding of the STF

According to the majority opinion, the act allows a home search, regardless of a court order, as long as there is evidence of the crime within the residence.

The GCM’s performance in the case judged this Tuesday, according to the understanding of the majority of ministers of the First Panel of the STF, fits into this situation.