Three-phase sentencing is mandatory in every criminal conviction (CP arts. 59-68). Each phase has its own methodology; errors are grounds for nullity or habeas corpus.
The three sentencing phases
1st phase (art. 59): base penalty between minimum and maximum, based on 8 judicial circumstances (culpability, antecedents, social conduct, personality, motives, circumstances, consequences, victim's behavior).
2nd phase (arts. 61-66): aggravating and mitigating factors in amounts not fixed by law. Mitigating factors cannot reduce below the statutory minimum (STJ Súm. 231).
3rd phase (arts. 68-70): special causes of increase (legal fractions, e.g., art. 157 §2) and decrease (e.g., attempt, repentance). Crime concurrence applied at the end.
Practical use
Simple robbery
Input
Art. 157: pena 4-10 anos. 1 circ. judicial desfavorável, sem agravantes, sem causas
Expected output
Pena-base ~5 anos → sem variação → regime fechado
Proportional fixing with calculation record for appellate challenge.
Safe use
Input
context + tool result
Expected output
interpreted with limits and next steps
Use the result as technical or educational support, keeping the tool limits explicit in the workflow.
Full tool FAQ
A method created by Nelson Hungria and endorsed by the STF: Phase 1 sets the base sentence within the statutory range; Phase 2 applies aggravating/mitigating factors; Phase 3 applies special increase/reduction factors (CP art. 68).
Frequently asked questions
Can a mitigating factor reduce the sentence below the statutory minimum?
No, STJ Súm. 231 states that mitigating factors cannot reduce the sentence below the statutory minimum.
How to challenge an excessive sentence?
Use this tool's calculation record in the appeal brief or habeas corpus to demonstrate disproportionality and insufficient reasoning (CF art. 93 IX).