Superior Court of Justice upholds sentence of more than 12 years for robbery against ride-hailing driver.

The Sixth Panel of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) decided to uphold the conviction of a man who robbed a ride-hailing driver while he was working. The sentence, exceeding 12 years in prison under a closed regime, was considered appropriate because the crime occurred while the victim was earning a living, which increases the seriousness of the conduct.

With this decision, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) reinforced the understanding that crimes committed against workers on duty can be treated more rigorously by the Justice system, especially when the perpetrator takes advantage of this condition.

According to the report, the driver was stopped on a public road at night, waiting for a fare, when he was approached by an armed man. Even after informing the man that he was working, the victim was forced out of the car, which was then driven away by the criminal. The vehicle was recovered the following day.

The conviction occurred in the first instance and was upheld by the Court of Justice of Alagoas. In addition to robbery, the defendant was also held responsible for illegal possession of a restricted firearm.

In the appeal to the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), the defense attempted to reduce the sentence, arguing that the increase applied had been based on generic justifications, such as the fact that the crime occurred at night. They also argued that the approach had been random.

The ministers, however, rejected the arguments. According to the case's rapporteur, Minister Sebastião Reis Júnior, there was a concrete factor that makes the crime more serious: the accused knew that the victim was working and, even so, decided to commit the robbery.

According to the court's understanding, the differentiating factor was not only the time of the crime, but the fact that the perpetrator exploited the vulnerability of a worker on the job. This point was decisive in justifying the higher sentence.

The decision was unanimous. Therefore, the sentence of more than 12 years in prison under a closed regime remains valid.