Pre-trial detention without concrete grounds
The decision must point to current facts showing a risk to public order, to the proceeding or to enforcement of the law. The abstract seriousness of the offense is not enough.
Criminal · freedom of movement
Habeas corpus protects the right to come and go against unlawfulness or abuse of power. It is not a generic appeal: it must point to a concrete restraint and prove it with documents.
Habeas corpus applies whenever someone suffers or is about to suffer violence or coercion of their freedom of movement through unlawfulness or abuse of power (article 5, LXVIII, of the Brazilian Constitution and article 647 of the CPP). Typical examples: pre-trial detention without concrete reasoning, excessive delay in the proceeding, an arrest report drawn up without a real situation of flagrante, denial of provisional release in a bailable offense, and dismissal of an inquiry or prosecution for lack of just cause.
This page is for pre-trial detainees, suspects with a detention order, relatives and lawyers seeking a second opinion. Emergency in-person assistance in the city of São Paulo (East, North and South zones), Guarulhos and the metropolitan area; other cases are handled throughout the State of São Paulo, Brazil, with remote meetings when appropriate.
The decision must point to current facts showing a risk to public order, to the proceeding or to enforcement of the law. The abstract seriousness of the offense is not enough.
A proceeding stalled for months without fault of the defense, or a defendant held beyond a reasonable time without judgment, constitutes unlawful restraint. The docket certificate is the central evidence.
When a precautionary measure other than detention, such as electronic monitoring or periodic reporting, would suffice, keeping the person in custody can be challenged.
When the alleged fact is not an offense, punishability is extinguished or there is no evidence at all, habeas corpus can end the inquiry or the prosecution.
Pregnant women, mothers of small children, seriously ill persons and caregivers of dependents may have detention replaced by house arrest under article 318 of the CPP.
Against an act of a first-instance judge, the petition goes to the São Paulo Court of Appeals (TJSP) or the Federal Regional Court (TRF-3); against a court decision, to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ); then to the Supreme Court (STF). Filing in the wrong court delays the analysis.
Habeas corpus has no evidence-gathering phase. Everything must be proven by documents at the time of filing.
The injunction requires unlawfulness identifiable at first sight. Arguments that depend on deep re-examination tend to wait for the merits.
Long, generic petitions hinder urgent analysis. The petition must identify the challenged decision, the unlawfulness and the relief sought.
Identifying the decision, the time elapsed and the viable arguments, discarding those without proof.
Objective petition with requests for an injunction and on the merits, filed with the competent court, with all documents.
Monitoring the injunction, the information from the lower court and the panel judgment, with oral argument when admitted.
A denied habeas corpus does not prevent another on new grounds. But repeating the same request without a new fact is usually rejected immediately.
Yes, the Constitution allows anyone to file it, even without a lawyer. In practice, the technical quality of the petition and the documents directly affects the chance of a favorable analysis.
There is no fixed deadline. Well-supported petitions usually have the injunction examined within a few days; the merits are judged by the panel afterwards, in variable time.
Only in exceptional cases of absolute nullity or flagrant unlawfulness. To discuss evidence and sentencing, the path is the appeal or the criminal review.
Legal bases of habeas corpus in Brazil. Actual viability depends on the challenged decision and the available documents.
Send the decision and the docket certificate. The screening indicates whether there is a documented argument for habeas corpus and in which court.