Article 131 Spanish Criminal Code: Limitation Periods for Offences

Article 131 of the Spanish Criminal Code fixes the periods after which an offence can no longer be prosecuted, measured not by the sentence actually likely but by the maximum penalty the law lays down for the offence: twenty years where that maximum is fifteen years of imprisonment or more, fifteen, ten and five years for the descending brackets, and one year for minor offences and for insult and calumny. Limitation is examined at the outset of every case, because it is the one argument capable of ending proceedings without any assessment of the evidence.

Wording of Article 131 of the Spanish Criminal Code

Elements of the offence

1. Identification of the offence as correctly classified, since the period depends on the maximum penalty laid down for it.
2. The starting point under article 132: the day the offence was committed, or in continuing offences the day the last act was performed, with special rules for offences against minors.
3. The absence of a valid interruption. Under article 132 the period is interrupted when proceedings are directed against the person, which requires a reasoned judicial decision attributing participation to that person.
4. For concurrence or connected offences, the period of the most serious offence, which is the rule that most often defeats a limitation argument.

Defence strategy

Contesting the classification in order to shorten the period. Because the period follows the maximum penalty of the offence charged, an argument on classification is also an argument on limitation. Reducing an aggravated fraud to the basic offence, an aggravated bodily harm to article 147, or a continuing offence to separate acts may bring the conduct within a shorter period. This calculation is performed at the first reading of the file, since it may dispose of the case entirely.

The date of interruption. The period is interrupted only when the proceedings are directed against the person concerned by a reasoned decision, not by the filing of a complaint nor by the opening of an investigation against unknown persons. Where a complaint lay dormant, where the accused was identified only years later, or where the decision naming him is undated or unreasoned, the interruption may not have occurred when the prosecution asserts. The docket, and not the indictment, establishes this.

The starting point in concealed offences. In offences whose effects emerge later, such as planning offences, offences against public revenue and property offences discovered on an audit, the period runs from the commission and not from the discovery. Establishing the date of completion is therefore decisive, and it is done with objective evidence: the certificate of works, the tax return filed, the entry in the register or the transfer of funds.

Connected offences and the risk of aggregation. The fourth paragraph applies the period of the most serious offence to connected infringements, and prosecutors use it to revive conduct otherwise barred. The defence contests the connection itself, since offences separated in time and in nature are not connected merely because the same accused is involved, and where the connection fails each offence recovers its own period.

• Article 136: cancellation of criminal records
• Article 74: continuing offence
• Criminal procedure deadline calculator
• Spanish-language entry

This entry is provided for information only and does not constitute legal advice. The application of any provision depends on the circumstances of the individual case and requires examination of the case file by a qualified lawyer.