Resumo:
The study, conducted through a legal-dogmatic investigation, aims to analyze how the objective
imputation theory has been addressed in Brazilian jurisprudence, with particular emphasis on
the scenarios of self-endangerment and consented hetero-endangerment. Initially, the research
presents the theoretical foundations of objective imputation, contextualizing its scope of
discussion, historical roots and guiding principles, in addition to arguing for the theory’s
compatibility with Brazilian legal system. In a second stage, the research delves into the legal
constructs of self-endangerment and hetero-endangerment are examined in order to establish
their criteria and parameters for application. Finally, the study offers a critical assessment of
four judicial decisions – two from the Superior Court of Justice and two from different State
Courts – providing a diagnostic assessment regarding the correct or incorrect application of the
concepts of self-endangerment and hetero-endangerment and ultimately drawing conclusions
on the current stage of understanding of the objective imputation theory within national
jurisprudence.
