Defense Strategies in Criminal Proceedings

In the legal and judicial context, criminal proceedings serve as a stage where various defense strategies are employed by lawyers to protect the rights and interests of their clients. These strategies are essential tools for building a solid and effective defense capable of challenging the accusations and arguments presented by the prosecution. Below, we review the seven most common defense strategies in criminal proceedings.

1. Denial of the facts
2. The first strategy is based on denying the facts attributed to the defendant. While risky—since it can create tension with the court and prosecution—it may be used when the defendant’s version is incompatible with the prosecution’s case. The lawyer’s aim is to raise doubt in the minds of the judges or jury by questioning the truth and strength of the evidence presented. Success depends largely on the lawyer’s ability to present persuasive arguments supporting the client’s version of events.
3. Acknowledging the facts but denying authorship
4. Here, the defendant accepts that the alleged events took place but denies direct responsibility. Rather than rejecting the events entirely, the focus is on showing that other circumstances or individuals influenced what happened, thereby weakening the link between the defendant and the commission of the crime.
5. Challenging the legal classification
6. In some cases, the defense does not dispute the facts but questions the legal classification applied. The argument here is that the events do not meet the legal elements required to qualify as the specific crime charged. This approach is especially effective when the classification is complex or open to interpretation.
7. Acknowledging the facts but focusing on mitigating circumstances
8. In this strategy, the defense accepts the events but emphasizes circumstances that could reduce the defendant’s responsibility. This may include evidence of provocation, self-defense, or extraordinary conditions. The goal is to convince the court that while the events occurred, mitigating factors lessen culpability.
9. Challenging evidence on grounds of nullity (Article 11.1 of the Criminal Code)
10. This strategy argues that certain evidence or procedures are invalid due to violations of fundamental rights or procedural errors. Article 11.1 of the Spanish Criminal Code introduces the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine, meaning that evidence derived from unlawfully obtained sources may also be excluded. The defense can argue that the prosecution’s evidence was obtained illegally or unconstitutionally, rendering it inadmissible.
11. Statute of limitations
12. Sometimes, the defense can argue that the crime has become time-barred, meaning the maximum legal period to initiate prosecution has expired. This strategy aims to show that criminal proceedings are no longer legally viable due to the passage of time. Its effectiveness depends on the applicable law and correct interpretation of limitation periods.
13. Plea agreement
14. In certain cases, the defense may consider negotiating with the prosecution. Under Article 787 of the Spanish Criminal Procedure Act, the parties can reach an agreement to resolve the case. By pleading guilty, the defendant receives a reduced sentence or other procedural benefits. This strategy can be effective when the evidence against the defendant is strong, and the risk of a harsher sentence is high.