Criminal Lawyers in Perjury in Criminal Trial

Perjury committed in criminal proceedings is the most serious modality of the offence under Art. 458 CP, precisely because criminal trials engage the legal interest of highest constitutional protection: the liberty of the accused and the integrity of judicial function. A witness who lies at a criminal trial compromises not only the administration of justice (the direct protected interest) but also the right to effective judicial protection under Art. 24 of the Spanish Constitution. Supreme Court case-law has consolidated that perjury intent requires both knowledge of the falsity and will to lie, excluding mere errors, lapses or minor discrepancies due to the passage of time or trial stress.

Modalities and Penalties (Art. 458 CP)

The modalities of Art. 458 CP are graduated by the direction and outcome of the falsehood. The basic offence (Art. 458.1) punishes with 6 months to 2 years' prison and 3 to 6 months' fine anyone lying in judicial testimony. The aggravated form of Art. 458.2 raises the penalty to 1 to 3 years' prison and 6 to 12 months' fine when perjury is given against the defendant in criminal proceedings. The harshest clause of the Spanish Criminal Code —the so-called "mirror penalty"— is also contained in Art. 458.2: if the perjury led to a conviction, the lying witness receives the same sentence as the unjustly convicted person, up to the maximum provided for aggravated perjury.

Collateral Consequences

Beyond imprisonment, the offence carries severe collateral consequences: special disqualification from public office, profession or trade (Art. 458.3 CP) where the offender is an authority, public official, police officer, expert witness or interpreter; a criminal record affecting immigration status, public competitive examinations and regulated activities; and civil liability for the patrimonial and moral damages caused to the unjustly convicted person and their family. Expert witnesses who certify falsely and interpreters who translate mendaciously respond under Art. 459 CP with the same penalties as the witness, by virtue of their reinforced duty of technical truthfulness.

Defence Strategy

The technical defense in criminal perjury rests on four axes consolidated by case-law. First, lack of perjurious intent: the Supreme Court demands unequivocal proof of knowledge and will to lie; mere contradiction between successive statements (investigation versus trial) does not by itself establish falsehood. Second, the material irrelevance of the mendacious point: the falsehood must concern facts with objective capacity to influence the judicial decision; lies about ancillary or irrelevant details are not punishable. Third, grounds excluding unlawfulness: the family dispensation of Art. 416 LECrim and the fundamental right not to self-incriminate (Art. 24.2 SC) exclude the offence. Fourth, the mitigating retraction of Art. 462 CP, which allows the lower-degree penalty when the witness rectifies spontaneously before judgment.

Current Forensic Practice

In current forensic practice, perjury proceedings in criminal cases are usually opened through testimony deduced by the investigating judge or by the trial court when reasonable indications of mendacity are appreciated. Organic Law 1/2025 on Justice Service Efficiency has reinforced the mechanisms for full recording of statements, secure videoconferencing and the digital chain of custody of audiovisual media, all decisive evidentiary elements for both prosecution and defence. At Alonso Sala, we address each case along two parallel routes: when defending the investigated witness, we build the exculpatory narrative on absence of intent, irrelevance or legal dispensation; when acting as private prosecution on behalf of the unjustly convicted, we articulate the criminal complaint, documentary and testimonial evidence and the eventual extraordinary review appeal of Art. 954 LECrim to annul the unjust sentence, drawing on 15+ years of experience before Provincial Courts and the Supreme Court.