“'The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means’... But only when I want!” About how (not to) work with precedents

Abstract

A semiotic analysis of the arguments brought to light by the 9th Criminal Chamber of São Paulo’s Court of Appeal when compared to the paradigmatic judgments of the Supreme Court in criminal proceedings harvest, dealing specifically with the presumption of innocence and the individualization of punishment. We used the phenomenological method to bring to São Paulo judicial practice a hermeneutic constraint directed to judicial solipsism.

Keywords

• Senso comum teórico dos juristas
• hermenêutica constitucional
• garantismo
• punitivismo
• precedentes.