RHC 196.496/RN: Criteria and Legal Benchmarks for Home Searches
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18769799Keywords:
Residential search, Search and seizure warrant, Abuse of Authority Law, Fundamental rights, Illicit evidence, Criminal procedureAbstract
The judgment in RHC 196.496/RN addressed the temporal limits for executing residential search warrants in Brazilian criminal procedure. The Superior Court of Justice upheld the validity of a search initiated at 5:05 a.m., based on Article 22, §1, III, of Law 13.869/2019, which establishes the timeframe between 5 a.m. and 9 p.m. The Court found no illegality in the evidence obtained. The case involved the interpretation of the concepts of “daytime” and “nighttime” under constitutional and procedural law. A dissenting opinion argued that the statute defines criminal liability parameters rather than the procedural concept of “daytime.”
Downloads
References
BRASIL. Constituição (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988. Brasília, DF: Presidência da República, 1988.
BRASIL. Decreto-Lei nº 3.689, de 3 de outubro de 1941. Código de Processo Penal. Diário Oficial da União: Rio de Janeiro, 13 out. 1941.
BRASIL. Lei nº 13.105, de 16 de março de 2015. Código de Processo Civil. Diário Oficial da União: Brasília, DF, 17 mar. 2015.
BRASIL. Lei nº 13.869, de 5 de setembro de 2019. Dispõe sobre os crimes de abuso de autoridade. Diário Oficial da União: Brasília, DF, 5 set. 2019.
BRASIL. Superior Tribunal de Justiça. Recurso em Habeas Corpus n. 196.496/RN. Relator: Ministro Sebastião Reis Júnior. Terceira Seção, julgado em 10 dez. 2025. Diário da Justiça Eletrônico Nacional, 19 dez. 2025.
BRASIL. Superior Tribunal de Justiça. Agravo Regimental no Habeas Corpus n. 674.354/MS. (Tema 1144). Diário da Justiça Eletrônico.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Vitor Bellotto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright of published articles belongs to the author, but with journal rights over the first publication and respecting the one-year exclusivity period. Authors may only use the same results in other publications by clearly indicating this journal as the medium of the original publication. If there is no such indication, it will be considered a situation of self-plagiarism.
Therefore, the reproduction, total or partial, of the articles published here is subject to the express mention of the origin of its publication in this journal, citing the volume and number of this publication. For legal purposes, the source of the original publication must be consigned, in addition to the DOI link for cross-reference (if any).
