info@societejuridique.com
Madrid: Paseo de la Castellana 216 8 ª Planta
Alicante: Av. Ansaldo Nº31, local 16
24h emergencies: 669 30 21 13
Article 988 of the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act: aggregation of sentences and maximum term to be served
Quick answerArticle 988 governs the declaration that a judgment is final and, in its third paragraph, the procedure for aggregating sentences: where a person convicted in separate proceedings was sentenced for facts that could have been the subject of a single case, the court that delivered the last judgment sets the maximum term to be served under article 76 of the Criminal Code, by an order open to cassation appeal for error of law.
The provision contains one of the institutions of greatest practical importance at the enforcement stage, since its correct application frequently produces a very substantial reduction in the actual time spent in custody. Its basis lies in the principles of proportionality and rehabilitation of article 25.2 of the Spanish Constitution, and its substantive content belongs to article 76 of the Criminal Code, which sets the threefold rule and the absolute caps of twenty, twenty-five, thirty and forty years. The case law of the Second Chamber has markedly relaxed the connection test, replacing the examination of material connection with a purely chronological one.
Also cited as: article 988 Spanish Criminal Procedure Act · art. 988 LECrim · LECrim article 988 · artículo 988 de la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Criminal.
Wording of the provision
Where a judgment is final under article 141 of this Act, the court that delivered it shall so declare.
Once that declaration is made, the judgment shall be enforced even if the convicted person is subject to other proceedings, in which case he shall be brought, where necessary, from the prison where he is serving his sentence to the place where the pending case is being investigated.
Where a person guilty of several offences has been convicted in separate proceedings for facts that could have been the subject of a single case, under article 17 of this Act, the court that delivered the last judgment shall, of its own motion or at the request of the public prosecutor or of the convicted person, set the limit on the service of the sentences imposed in accordance with article 76 of the Criminal Code. To that end, the court clerk shall request the criminal record sheet from the Central Register of Convicted Persons and certified copies of the convictions and, after the opinion of the public prosecutor where he is not the applicant, the court shall issue an order listing all the sentences imposed and determining the maximum term to be served. The public prosecutor and the convicted person may lodge a cassation appeal for error of law against that order.
Consolidated text published by the Spanish Official State Gazette, Royal Decree of 14 September 1882 approving the Criminal Procedure Act. Unofficial English rendering; the Spanish text is the authentic one.
Sentencing range. The provision imposes no penalty: it determines the competent court, standing, the procedure and the available appeal for setting the maximum term under article 76 of the Criminal Code.
Key facts
| Location | Book VII of the Criminal Procedure Act, on the enforcement of judgments |
|---|---|
| Substantive rule | Article 76 of the Criminal Code, setting the threefold rule and the absolute caps |
| Competent court | The court that delivered the last judgment |
| Standing | Of the court’s own motion, at the request of the public prosecutor or of the convicted person |
| Mandatory documents | Criminal record sheet and certified copies of the convictions |
| Procedure | Opinion of the public prosecutor where he is not the applicant |
| Appeal | Cassation for error of law, available to the public prosecutor and the convicted person |
| Current wording | Article 2.150 of Act 13/2009 of 3 November, as to the third paragraph |
Elements and scope
- The existence of several final convictions imposed in separate proceedings, a requirement that excludes sentences already fully served at the time of the application on the prevailing case-law view.
- The possibility that the facts could have been the subject of a single set of proceedings under article 17, a test the Second Chamber has reduced to a strictly chronological examination.
- Jurisdiction of the court that delivered the last judgment, determined by the date of the judgment and not by the date it became final.
- Request for the criminal record sheet and certified copies of the judgments, preparatory steps falling to the court clerk.
- A reasoned order listing all the sentences imposed and determining the maximum term to be served under article 76 of the Criminal Code.
Points of application
Chronological test for aggregation. The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court abandoned the examination of material connection and settled on the temporal test: sentences for facts committed before the date of the earliest of the judgments being aggregated may be aggregated, whatever the nature of the offences.
Multiple aggregations. Where not all convictions can be aggregated in a single block, as many blocks as possible should be formed, choosing the combination most favourable to the convicted person, under the principle of the most beneficial hypothesis.
Sentences already served. The dominant view excludes from aggregation sentences fully served or extinguished, while allowing the aggregation to be revisited where new convictions for earlier facts arise.
Convictions handed down abroad. Aggregation of sentences imposed by courts of other member states is governed by Organic Act 7/2014 of 12 November, with the limitations laid down in its sole additional provision.
No preclusive effect. The aggregation order does not have the force of res judicata. The application may be renewed where new judgments appear or where a change in case law allows a more favourable combination.
Defence strategy
Apply for aggregation on the lawyer’s initiative. It is unwise to wait for the court to act. The defence should initiate the file before the court that delivered the last judgment, attaching a list of the known cases and judgments.
Request the complete criminal record sheet. Omission of a conviction from the record sheet frustrates the aggregation. Its completeness should be verified and any gaps corrected.
Propose the most favourable combination. Where several blocks are possible, the defence should calculate every hypothesis and argue for the one producing the lowest maximum term.
Appeal in cassation. The order may be challenged in cassation for error of law. This is the route for correcting the improper exclusion of a conviction or an erroneous calculation of the article 76 limit.
Renew the application after new convictions. The absence of res judicata allows a fresh aggregation to be sought where judgments for earlier facts appear or where the case law changes.
Defence in this area
If you or your company are facing proceedings in this area, the firm provides defence and prosecution in Alicante and Madrid, with 24-hour assistance to detained persons.
Are you under investigation or facing charges in Spain? Société Juridique acts for foreign nationals throughout Spain, with offices in Alicante and Madrid and a 24-hour custody line. +34 669 30 21 13 or enquire online.
- Spanish Criminal Code by article
- Criminal Procedure Act by article
- Practical defence guides
- Contact the firm
This page is provided for information only and does not constitute legal advice. The application of any provision depends on the circumstances of the case and requires review of the file by a lawyer. The English rendering of the legal text is unofficial.
Last reviewed: 21 September 2026.
Frequently asked questions
What is aggregation of sentences?
It is the procedure by which a maximum combined term is set for several sentences imposed in separate proceedings, under article 76 of the Criminal Code, avoiding the arithmetical addition of all the sentences.
Who can apply for it?
The convicted person, the public prosecutor, or the court of its own motion. The application is made to the court that delivered the last judgment.
Which sentences can be aggregated?
Under the settled chronological test, those imposed for facts committed before the date of the earliest of the judgments being aggregated, whatever the nature of the offences.
Can the order be appealed?
Yes. Both the public prosecutor and the convicted person may lodge a cassation appeal for error of law against the order setting the maximum term.
Can the application be renewed if refused?
Yes. The order does not have the force of res judicata, so the application may be renewed where new judgments for earlier facts appear or where a change in case law allows a more favourable combination.
Paseo De La Castellana 216 8º 28046 Madrid
Alicante – Playa de San Juan Av. Ansaldo 31, local 16, 03540 Alicante
London: 20 Wenlock Road, N1 7GU, United Kingdom
Paris: 72 Faubourg St Honoré, 75008, France
info@societejuridique.com
SERVICES
LINKS
Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert is a law firm with offices in Madrid, Alicante, London and Paris, specialising in criminal law, technology law and economic and corporate crime. We provide strategic guidance in complex criminal proceedings, intellectual property and technological resources for legal decision-making with advanced forensic analysis. Our multidisciplinary team combines legal experience, legal intelligence and personal attention to deliver effective solutions adapted to each case. Legal assistance available 24 hours a day and online consultations.
Copyright © 2026 Société de Conseil Juridique et Expert S.L.
Where we act: Alicante·Madrid·Elche·Torrevieja·Orihuela·Benidorm·Alcoy·San Vicente·Elda·Denia·Villajoyosa·Villena·Novelda·Ibi·All locations
Defence by offence: Drink driving·Robbery and theft·Assault·Sexual offences·Threats·Squatting·Homicide·Criminal records