What the limitation of criminal offences means
The limitation (or time-barring) of an offence is one of the grounds for extinction of criminal liability listed in article 130 of the Spanish Criminal Code (art. 130.1.6 CP). Once the period set by law has elapsed without the proceedings being directed against the person responsible, the State loses the power to prosecute and punish that act. Its rationale is twofold: legal certainty — no one should remain indefinitely exposed to prosecution — and the progressive weakening of both the need for punishment and the available evidence as time passes. Procedurally, limitation can be raised at any stage, and its acceptance leads to the dismissal of the case or an acquittal.
The limitation periods of article 131 CP
Article 131.1 CP scales the periods according to the maximum penalty the law attaches to the offence in abstract — not the penalty sought by the prosecution or the one eventually imposed:
- 20 years, where the maximum penalty is imprisonment of 15 years or more.
- 15 years, where the maximum penalty is disqualification for more than 10 years, or imprisonment of more than 10 and less than 15 years.
- 10 years, where the maximum penalty is imprisonment or disqualification of more than 5 and up to 10 years.
- 5 years, for all other offences.
- 1 year, for petty offences and for slander and libel.
Where the penalty is compound — for instance imprisonment plus a fine or disqualification — the one requiring the longer period governs (art. 131.2 CP). In cases of concurrent or connected offences, the period of the most serious offence applies (art. 131.4 CP). As a closing exception, art. 131.3 CP provides that crimes against humanity, genocide and crimes against persons and property protected in armed conflict (except those punished under art. 614 CP) are never time-barred, nor are terrorism offences that caused a person’s death.
The penalty that counts is the abstract maximum
A common mistake is to calculate limitation on the specific penalty requested by the prosecutor or imposed in the judgment. The system of art. 131 CP works the other way round: what matters is the ceiling the law assigns to the offence charged, including any aggravated subtypes actually charged. That is why basic fraud under art. 248 CP (6 months to 3 years of imprisonment) becomes time-barred after 5 years, while trafficking in drugs causing serious health damage under art. 368 CP (3 to 6 years) becomes time-barred after 10 years, even if the penalty actually sought were similar in both cases.
When the clock starts: the dies a quo under article 132.1 CP
The periods run "from the day on which the punishable offence was committed". On top of that general rule, art. 132.1 CP adds important refinements: for a continuing course of criminal conduct the period runs from the day of the last infringement; for a permanent offence, from the day the unlawful situation was removed (for example, when an unlawful detention ends); and for offences requiring habituality, from the day the conduct ceased.
Minor victims: two different regimes
When the victim was under 18 at the time of the offence, art. 132.1 CP delays the start of the count, but it does so through two different catalogues that must not be confused. For a first group — non-consensual abortion, injuries, offences against liberty, torture and offences against moral integrity, against privacy, one’s own image and the inviolability of the home, and against family relations — the period runs from the day the victim reaches the age of majority. For a second, stricter catalogue — attempted homicide, injuries under arts. 149 and 150 CP, habitual abuse under art. 173.2 CP, offences against sexual freedom and human trafficking — the period does not start until the victim turns 35. Under both regimes, if the victim dies before reaching that age, the count starts on the date of death. Outside those catalogues the general rule applies: a theft committed against a minor, for example, is time-barred from the date of the facts, not from any later birthday. This calculator applies each regime according to the type of offence, precisely to avoid that error.
Interruption of the limitation period (art. 132.2 CP)
The limitation period does not run inexorably: it is interrupted — and all elapsed time is disregarded — when the proceedings are directed against the person presumed responsible. The law requires a reasoned judicial decision attributing to a specific person their alleged participation in the act (art. 132.2, rule 1 CP). In addition, the mere filing of a complaint or criminal report before a court against a specific person suspends the count for up to 6 months: if the judicial decision is issued within that time, the interruption is deemed to have occurred retroactively on the filing date; otherwise the count resumes (art. 132.2, rule 2 CP). After each interruption the period starts again from zero once the proceedings stall or end without conviction. This is why the result of this tool is only a starting point: the date shown assumes that no interrupting act has taken place, something that can only be verified by examining the case file.
Limitation of the offence vs limitation of the sentence
The limitation of the offence must not be confused with the limitation of the sentence. The former (arts. 131 and 132 CP) bars prosecution before a final conviction exists. The latter (art. 133 CP) operates after a final judgment, where the sentence imposed is not served, and has its own longer periods, reaching 30 years for prison sentences of more than 20 years and going down to one year for minor penalties.
How to use this calculator and its limits
Pick a common offence — the tool already embeds the verified maximum penalty of each basic type — or, if your scenario is not listed, select the maximum-penalty bracket directly. Enter the date of the facts (for continuing or permanent offences, the date of the last infringement or of the cessation) and, where applicable, indicate that the victim was a minor so the correct counting regime is applied. The result is an abstract estimate based on the basic offence: aggravated or mitigated subtypes, concurrence rules, compound penalties and, above all, the interruptions of art. 132.2 CP can completely change the conclusion. For any real case, the analysis should be carried out by a criminal defence lawyer with the case file at hand.