HC 926371 - ACORDAO

Negou-se provimento ao agravo regimental porque o laudo pericial foi confeccionado por médico psiquiatra judiciário integrante da CAPM, equiparado a perito oficial, sendo desnecessária a assinatura de dois peritos oficiais; ademais, a pretensão defensiva exigiria reexame fático-probatório vedado na via do habeas...

Source-derived case information.

Parties: Paciente/agravante: PÉRCIO PIRES PORTELLA
Court: Superior Tribunal de Justiça
Jurisdiction: Brazil
Judgment Date: 30 June 2025
Procedural Posture: Agravo Regimental Em Habeas Corpus / Decisão Colegiada Da Turma
Outcome: Negado provimento ao agravo regimental
Legal Topics: Incidente De Insanidade Mental, Laudo Pericial, Perito Oficial, Habeas Corpus, Reexame Fático Probatório

Direito Processual Penal Incidente De Insanidade Mental Laudo Pericial Perito Oficial Habeas Corpus Reexame Fático Probatório

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2

Parties

PÉRCIO PIRES PORTELLA

Paciente/agravante

Procedural Posture

Agravo Regimental Em Habeas Corpus / Decisão Colegiada Da Turma

Legal Issues

1 validade de laudo pericial elaborado por psiquiatra judiciário integrante da CAPM
2 necessidade de assinatura por dois peritos quando se tratar de perito oficial
3 uso do habeas corpus como substitutivo de recurso próprio

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Negado provimento ao agravo regimental

Orders

Negar provimento ao agravo regimental

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.