Christmas!

In this case, the boy was convicted in the first degree, for theft, sentenced to five years and four months in prison, in the initial semi-open. On appeal, the Court of the State of Sao Paulo downgraded to conduct the robbery and set the penalty at two years of imprisonment in the open, replaced by service to the community.

In habeas corpus, the defense argued the atypicality of conduct, which did not produce any harm to legally protected by criminal law, especially given the small value of the stolen, valued at $ 30. He therefore asked the locking of the criminal action.

For the rapporteur, action can be considered irrelevant to the criminal sphere, particularly because the incident did not cause any harmful consequence, since the property has been properly restored, thus justifying the application of the principle of insignificance or trifle.

In the event of theft, said the justice Laurita Vaz, to believe that the agent's conduct resulted in no real danger and relevant so as to injure or endanger the legal interests protected by the rule, one should combine the lack of damage to the heritage of victim with the danger of social action and the very small degree of disapproval of the behavior of the agent, which occurs in the case.