TEIXEIRA DE CASTRO JUDGMENT OF 9 JUNE 1998 4 handed them over to the applicant in exchange for a payment, which, though the precise figure is not known, exceeded PTE 100,000. 12. The applicant then took the drugs to V.S.’s home; V.S. had in the meantime returned there and the two police officers were waiting outside. The deal was to take place in the house. The officers went inside at V.S.’s invitation; the applicant then took one of the sachets out of his pocket, whereupon the two officers identified themselves and arrested the applicant, V.S. and F.O., shortly before 2 a.m. They searched all three and found the applicant to be in possession of another two sachets of heroin, PTE 43,000 in cash and a gold bracelet. B. Progress of the proceedings 1. Preliminary investigation 13. The applicant was brought before an investigating judge at the Famalição Criminal Court later that day and was detained pending trial. 14. On 29 January 1993 he applied for release. He argued that his detention was unlawful as it infringed Articles 3, 6 and 8 of the Convention. In his submission, he had been detained as a result of the immoral and unlawful conduct of the two police officers, since he had committed the offence solely and exclusively at their behest. They had acted as “agents provocateurs”, particularly as they had not been carrying out an anti-drugtrafficking operation pursuant to a court order. 15. The investigating judge dismissed that application in a decision of 16 February 1993 that was upheld on 21 April 1993 by the Oporto Court of Appeal (Tribunal da Relação). 16. The applicant lodged two applications for habeas corpus with the Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal de Justiça), which were dismissed on 11 March and 13 May 1993. In its judgment of 13 May the Supreme Court held that although the two police officers had acted as “agents provocateurs” in the sale of the heroin the applicant’s detention was justified since he had been found in possession of the drug. 17. On 26 August 1993 the public prosecutor filed his submissions concerning the applicant and V.S. He did not proceed with the prosecution of the other two people charged, F.O. and J.P.O. 18. The case file was sent to the Santo Tirso Criminal Court (Tribunal de circulo). 2. Trial and appeal (a) Before the Santo Tirso Criminal Court 19. A hearing was held on 25 November 1993 at which the court heard several witnesses, including the two police officers and F.O.