Criminal Lawyers for Constitutional Appeals (Amparo)
Constitutional appeals (recurso de amparo) for protection of fundamental rights violations.
Last updated:
The constitutional appeal (recurso de amparo) before the Constitutional Court is the last domestic remedy for protecting fundamental rights violated in criminal proceedings. It is not a third instance or a new trial; it exclusively addresses violations of constitutional rights: the right to a fair trial (Art. 24 CE), presumption of innocence, effective judicial protection, equality before the law, and personal freedom.
Admissibility Requirements
The Constitutional Court admits only a small fraction of amparo applications. Requirements include: exhaustion of all prior remedies (appeal and cassation must have been filed first); filing within 30 days of the final judicial decision; raising the constitutional violation at the earliest opportunity in lower courts; and demonstrating special constitutional significance (the case must raise a constitutional question of general importance, not just a private injustice).
Our Approach
Given the Constitutional Court's extremely low admission rate, our strategy focuses on: preserving constitutional issues from the trial stage (making timely objections that create the record for amparo); crafting applications that demonstrate special constitutional significance (connecting the individual case to broader constitutional principles); and, when appropriate, preparing for the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg) as the ultimate remedy after exhausting domestic avenues.
Criminal Procedure in Spain: Fast Trials, Extraditions & Prison Law — Defence Guide
Beyond substantive criminal offences, Spanish law contains a complex procedural framework that directly affects defence strategy. Fast-track trials (juicios rápidos), extradition procedures (European Arrest Warrants and bilateral treaties), penitentiary law (classification grades, parole, sentence review) and juvenile justice (LO 5/2000) each demand specialised knowledge. Understanding procedural rights and deadlines is often decisive for the outcome of a case.
Key Procedural Frameworks
| Framework | Legal Basis | Scope | Key Feature |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fast-track trials | Arts. 795-803 LECrim | Offences punishable by up to 5 years prison | Trial within 15 days of arrest |
| European Arrest Warrant | LO 23/2014 | Cross-EU extradition | 60-day maximum execution |
| Prison classification | LO 1/1979 (LOGP) | Classification into grades 1, 2 or 3 | Open regime (grade 3) = semi-liberty |
| Conditional release | Arts. 90-93 CP | Release from prison on licence | ¾ of sentence served + good conduct |
| Juvenile justice | LO 5/2000 | Offenders aged 14-17 | Educative measures, not punishment |
| Criminal record expungement | Art. 136 CP | Deletion of criminal record | Timeframe varies by offence severity |
Key Defence Strategies
Fast-Trial Conformity Advantage
In fast-track proceedings, agreeing to a plea (conformidad) with the prosecution can yield a sentence reduction of up to one-third. This can make the difference between prison and a suspended sentence.
EAW Refusal Grounds
European Arrest Warrants may be refused on grounds of: ne bis in idem (double jeopardy), time-barred offence, minor's age, or if the person will serve the sentence in Spain. Each ground requires specific procedural challenges.
Prison Grade Review
Inmates may contest their classification grade before the Supervisory Judge (Juez de Vigilancia Penitenciaria). Progression to grade 3 (semi-liberty) requires demonstrating good conduct, personal development and reduced recidivism risk.
Juvenile Diversion
For juvenile offenders, the defence can request diversion (sobreseimiento) if the minor completes a mediation or reparation programme. This avoids formal proceedings and prevents a juvenile record entirely.
Key Case Law
The Court confirmed that defendants who reach a plea agreement in fast-track proceedings have an absolute right to the one-third sentence reduction. The judge cannot refuse the agreed sentence if it falls within the statutory range.
The CJEU established that execution of a European Arrest Warrant may be suspended if there is a real risk of inhumane treatment in the issuing state. The executing authority must request specific assurances before surrender.
The Constitutional Court holds that prison classification decisions must be reasoned and subject to periodic review, in line with the fundamental rights of sentenced persons under Art. 25.2 CE.
Why Choose Us?
Need a criminal defense lawyer for this type of offense? Here's how we work:
Do you need specialised legal assistance?
The judicial system is complex. We have the criminal-law specialisation and technical resources required to take on the defence.