Criminal defence throughout Spain · offices in Madrid and Alicante
Criminal liability is not eternal. Article 130 of the Criminal Code lists its causes of extinction, and among them limitation is the most litigated: every year thousands of cases are closed because the State arrived late.
In brief. Limitation is applied ex officio and at any stage of the proceedings. The period depends on the maximum penalty of the offence, from one to twenty years (Article 131). A complaint interrupts the clock only if the proceedings are directed against a specific person and admitted (Article 132). The penalty itself also becomes time-barred if not enforced (Article 133).
Criminal liability is not eternal. Article 130 of the Criminal Code lists its causes of extinction: death of the convicted person, service of the sentence, definitive remission after suspension, pardon, the victim’s forgiveness where the law admits it (minor offences prosecutable at the injured party’s instance), limitation of the offence and limitation of the penalty. Among them, limitation generates the most litigation: every year thousands of cases are closed because the State arrived late.
This guide reviews the full catalogue, the periods of Article 131 and the interruption rules that decide whether a case is alive or dead. Every alternative classification changes the clock, which is why classifications are argued also in limitation terms: an aggravated fraud under Article 250 becomes time-barred at ten years (penalty of up to six), the basic form at five.
| Penalty of the offence | Limitation period | Rule | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| 15 years or more | 20 years | 131.1 | Homicide |
| More than 10, up to 15 | 15 years | 131.1 | Serious aggravated offences |
| More than 5, up to 10 | 10 years | 131.1 | Aggravated fraud (Art. 250) |
| Other serious and less serious | 5 years | 131.1 | Common fraud, injuries, threats |
| Criminal libel and slander | 1 year | 131.1 | Defamation offences |
| Minor offences | 1 year | 131.1 | Minor theft, minor damage |
| Never time-barred | None | 131.3 | Terrorism with death, crimes against humanity |
| Penalties (Art. 133) | 5 to 30 years | From finality or breach | Fugitives returning after the period |
The periods are set out in general terms; the computation in a specific case depends on the classification, the interruption acts and the complete procedural file.
Limitation is appreciated ex officio and at any procedural stage, but nobody audits it as thoroughly as a defence that knows what it is looking for. The six-month rule (the complaint suspends; admission against a specific person consolidates) generates the typical litigation: generic admissions interrupt for nobody, and the file is reviewed decision by decision to establish who was identified and when. The classification is argued also as a limitation question, because each alternative offence carries a different clock.
The penalty itself dies too: before any voluntary surrender of a client with an old warrant, we verify whether the penalty has become time-barred from finality or breach, with the computation stopped during suspensions and other service. And the cancellation of records is a mandatory defence routine: the right arises automatically when the Article 136 periods elapse, but the register does not update itself, and a cancellable record can neither aggravate through recidivism nor block a suspension.
Facts from years ago that resurface: the limitation audit as the first line of defence.
Fugitives and persons convicted in absentia: verification of the penalty’s limitation before any voluntary appearance.
Cancellation of records that block suspensions, permits or nationality: request and rectification.
Injured parties who must interrupt the clock in time: complaints directed against identified persons and effective admission.
Speak to a criminal lawyer
Criminal defence in English before the courts of Alicante and the rest of Spain, for residents and for visitors who have flown home.