Criminal Sentences: Structure, Consistency, and Res Judicata

Posted on Jan 10, 2026 in Law & Jurisprudence

Criminal Sentences: Definition and Function

Sentences always end the process. The Law of Criminal Procedure (LECrim) states that sentences are the resolutions that conclude the process and explicitly incorporate the Law.

Judgments are typically issued only in specific cases:

  • To resolve an appeal.
  • To resolve an appeal (repetition noted in original text).

In all other instances, the court issues orders.

Types of Criminal Sentences

Criminal sentences can have two statements:

  1. Acquittals: These sentences are issued when there is insufficient evidence to convict a particular person. They are merely declarative sentences.
  2. Convictions: These are held when there is sufficient evidence to convict a particular person, resulting in the imposition of a penalty. They are also declarative sentences, but judgments of conviction are always enforceable.

Structure of the Judicial Sentence

The structure was previously defined in the LECrim. However, Article 245 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary (LOPJ) repealed the relevant section of the LECrim. The LOPJ now defines the structure as follows:

  1. Heading.
  2. Fundamentals of Fact (presented in separate, numbered paragraphs).
  3. Fundamentals of Law (including arguments of the parties, applicable rules, etc.).
  4. Judgment (the operative part of the decision).
  5. If the decision is unanimous among all members of the Court, an order for costs may be added.

If there are multiple defendants, there will be a corresponding number of sentences issued.

Formation of the Judicial Decision

The Tribunal members meet, and the presiding judge describes the decision, followed by a vote. There may be individual opinions (dissenting or concurring). Once the sentencing is signed, it is binding, except for the judge who issued a dissenting opinion.

Correction and Clarification of Sentences

Once a sentence is passed, it cannot be corrected, except for mathematical errors or specific expressions. However, parties may seek clarification of the sentence, which is resolved by an Order that is subsequently added to the Judgment itself.

Consistency of Judicial Judgments

All judgments must be consistent with the requests made by the parties in their pleadings. Inconsistency can manifest in two ways:

  • Inconsistency by Default: Occurs when the judge fails to rule on an issue that has been the subject of debate.
  • Inconsistency by Excess: Occurs when the judge rules on issues that were not discussed in the process.

To determine if a sentence is consistent, the sentence as a whole must be compared with the activity of the Judge, specifically:

  1. The notice of final assessment provided by the accusers.
  2. The notice of final grade provided by the accused.
  3. Whether the Court utilized the theory outlined in Article 733 of the LECrim.

A sentence is considered consistent when it aligns with these factors.

Res Judicata: Finality and Legal Certainty

Res judicata refers to the finality of a sentence, often equating to the principle of double jeopardy. This firmness is essential to meet the requirements of the principle of legal certainty.

Res judicata is an institution that strengthens judgments, ensuring their security and preventing them from being challenged in subsequent processes.

Types of Res Judicata

  • Formal Res Judicata: This is equivalent to firmness or finality. It means there is no appeal against that ruling, and therefore, it can be implemented. In criminal matters, only firm judgments can be executed; provisional sentences are never run, unlike in the civil field.
  • Material Res Judicata: This is identified as the true res judicata, as it indicates the binding effect the sentence produces in another process. The facts cannot be retried in a separate process. It produces two primary effects:

Effects of Material Res Judicata

  • Negative Effect: Once a case is resolved, the same actions cannot be retried against the same person (the principle of non bis in idem, or double jeopardy).
  • Positive Effect: The ruling issued by the judge in that judgment is binding in subsequent processes (e.g., when addressing a related criminal question).

Identifying Res Judicata

To determine if res judicata applies, two factors must be analyzed:

  • Objective Element: Identifying the specific events that have occurred.
  • Subjective Element: Identifying the offender, meaning considering only the person of the accused.

When the same events involve the same person, the situation constitutes double jeopardy.