Suspension of the Criminal Trial: Most Frequent Causes

Suspension of the criminal trial: most frequent causes

Reaching the day of the trial after months or even years of criminal proceedings is, for any defendant, a moment of enormous tension. For this reason, when upon arriving at court it is announced that the trial is suspended, the immediate reaction is a mixture of relief and confusion. What has happened? What does this mean? When will it be held? Can it be used to the benefit of the defence?

The suspension of the trial is a reality much more frequent than one might think. The Spanish judicial system accumulates an enormous workload, and the causes that may lead to a trial not being held on the scheduled date are varied and, in many cases, completely unrelated to the will of the parties. However, not all suspensions have the same origin nor the same procedural consequences, and understanding the differences between them can be very useful for anyone involved in a criminal proceeding.

In this article we explain what the suspension of the trial is, what are the most frequent causes that provoke it, what happens to the process after it is suspended and what rights the parties have in these situations. A clear understanding of this figure can help you better manage the uncertainty it generates and act more effectively when it occurs.

What does it mean that the trial is suspended?

The suspension of the trial is the decision of the court not to hold the hearing on the scheduled date and to postpone it to a later time. It should not be confused with adjournment —which may occur before the start of the trial— nor with interruption, which is the temporary halt of a trial that has already begun and that will resume on subsequent days.

The suspension may occur before the start of the act —when the court notes that there is some preventing cause before the parties have begun their actions— or once the trial has started, when the cause arises during the development of the hearing itself. In this second case, the law establishes that the evidence already practiced before the suspension may, under certain conditions, retain its validity if the trial resumes before the same court.

When the suspension is ordered, the court must set a new date for the holding of the trial as soon as possible. However, in practice, the accumulation of pending cases in many courts means that the new date may be delayed by weeks, months or even longer, which prolongs the uncertainty and personal cost of the process for all parties involved.

Cause 1: non-appearance of the defendant

The most well-known cause of suspension and, in many cases, the most feared due to its consequences is the non-appearance of the defendant. Spanish criminal procedure generally requires the physical presence of the defendant during the trial. Their unjustified absence not only prevents the holding of the trial: it may trigger very serious consequences that worsen their procedural situation.

When the defendant does not appear on the scheduled date without having justified their absence beforehand, the court may suspend the trial and issue an arrest warrant to ensure their presence on the next date. Furthermore, if the defendant was on provisional release, their non-appearance may be grounds for the judge to revoke that situation and order their pre-trial detention.

There is, however, an important exception: in certain minor offences and in cases where the requested sentence does not exceed two years of imprisonment, the trial may be held in the absence of the defendant if they have been duly summoned and are represented by their lawyer. In these cases, non-appearance does not necessarily lead to suspension, although the defendant loses the opportunity to testify personally and to make use of the right to the last word.

If the non-appearance is justified —due to proven illness, hospitalisation or any other duly documented force majeure— the defendant or their lawyer must communicate it to the court as far in advance as possible and provide supporting documentation. In that case, the trial is suspended without additional consequences for the defendant and a new date is set.

Cause 2: non-appearance of essential witnesses or experts

Another frequent cause of suspension is the non-appearance of witnesses or experts whose testimony has been admitted as evidence and whose presence is considered essential for the development of the trial. When a summoned witness or expert does not appear, the court must assess whether their testimony is so relevant that the trial cannot be held with guarantees without it, or whether the trial can proceed without their testimony.

If the court considers that the evidence is essential for the outcome of the trial, it will order the suspension and adopt the necessary measures to ensure the appearance of the witness or expert on the new date: it may impose a fine for unjustified non-appearance, order that they be brought to court by law enforcement, or, in exceptional cases, charge them with an offence of disobedience.

This cause of suspension highlights the importance of properly managing the summoning of one’s own witnesses before the trial. The defence lawyer must ensure that the witnesses they have proposed have been duly summoned, that they are aware of the date and place of the appearance and that they are available. A non-appearance that causes the suspension of the trial may result in weeks or months of additional waiting and a considerable economic and personal cost.

Cause 3: sudden illness of the defendant, lawyer or member of the court

Sudden illness is one of the most common causes of suspension and, at the same time, one of the easiest to justify when it is real. If the defendant, their defence lawyer or any member of the court falls ill suddenly and unpredictably before or during the trial, it must be suspended.

In the case of the defendant, the illness that prevents their presence at trial must be duly accredited by means of a medical certificate or hospital report. It is not enough to communicate it verbally: the court needs documentation that proves both the illness and the real impossibility of appearing.

When it is the defence lawyer who becomes ill, the situation is equally serious from a procedural point of view, because the defendant has the right to be represented at trial by a lawyer of their choice who knows the case. Replacing the lawyer hastily on the eve of the trial, with a professional who has not had time to study the file, may be more harmful than the suspension itself. Therefore, when the defence lawyer falls ill, suspension is generally the option that best guarantees the defendant’s rights.

If it is a member of the court who cannot appear —due to illness or another justified cause— the trial must also be suspended, since the principle of immediacy requires that the same judges who witness the evidence are the ones who issue the judgment. This cause is less frequent but equally valid.

Cause 4: need to carry out new proceedings or evidence

Sometimes, during the development of the trial itself or just before it begins, the need arises to carry out proceedings or evidence that were not initially foreseen and without which the court cannot resolve the case with the necessary guarantees. This situation may occur for different reasons:

It may happen that during witness statements new and relevant facts emerge that require investigation before the court can rule. It may also happen that one of the parties presents documents or evidence during the trial itself that the other party needs time to analyse and challenge. Or it may happen that the court, on its own initiative, considers it necessary to obtain additional information in order to properly assess the evidence presented.

In all these cases, the suspension of the trial has a safeguarding purpose: it is intended to ensure that the process is resolved with all relevant information available and that none of the parties is prejudiced by lack of time to react to unforeseen circumstances. The defence may, in certain circumstances, take advantage of this type of suspension to propose additional evidence that strengthens its position or contradicts elements of the prosecution that have gained relevance during the trial.

Cause 5: raising preliminary issues that require resolution

At the beginning of the trial, before the taking of evidence, the parties may raise preliminary issues or matters of prior determination that the court must resolve before entering into the merits of the case. These issues may refer to the jurisdiction of the court, the statute of limitations of the offence, the violation of fundamental rights during the investigation, the existence of res judicata or any other circumstance that, if upheld, would prevent the continuation of the trial.

When the preliminary issues raised are particularly complex and require more detailed legal analysis than the trial itself allows, the court may suspend the hearing to resolve them with the necessary reflection. If the preliminary issue is upheld, the trial may not be held. If it is dismissed, the trial resumes on the date set by the court.

The raising of well-founded preliminary issues is an important strategic tool in the hands of the defence lawyer. In some cases, a successful preliminary issue may prevent the trial from being held, which represents the best possible outcome for the defendant. For this, it is essential that the lawyer has thoroughly analysed the case file during the investigation and has identified all possible procedural violations that may be raised at this stage.

Cause 6: accumulation of cases and scheduling problems of the court

One of the most frequent causes of suspension in practice —although also one of the most frustrating for the parties— is the accumulation of cases in the court that prevents the trial from being held on the scheduled date for purely organisational reasons. Spanish courts bear a very high workload, and it is not uncommon for hearings to accumulate or for a previous trial to last longer than expected, preventing the next one from being held at the scheduled time.

This cause of suspension has the particularity that it is not attributable to any of the parties and is a direct consequence of structural problems in the judicial system. However, its effects on the people involved in the process are equally real: prolongation of uncertainty, new economic costs —lawyer’s fees, travel, lost working days— and the personal strain of having an open criminal process for longer than necessary.

When the suspension is due to the court’s scheduling reasons, the trial is set for a new date as soon as possible, although in practice “as soon as possible” may mean weeks or months of additional waiting. If the delays are excessive and unjustified, the lawyer may file motions or applications urging the court to schedule urgently, especially when the defendant is in pre-trial detention and each day of delay has a direct impact on their liberty.

Cause 7: last-minute plea agreement

A cause of suspension —or more precisely, of non-holding of the trial— that actually represents a favourable outcome for the process is the plea agreement reached at the last moment between the defence and the Prosecutor. Although technically it is not a “suspension” in the strict sense of the term, its practical effect is the same: the trial is not held on the scheduled date because the process has been concluded in another way.

Negotiations aimed at reaching a plea agreement may progress during the days or weeks prior to the trial, and it is not uncommon for the agreement to be reached in the days immediately before the hearing or even during the trial itself, before any evidence is taken. In these cases, the trial does not take place because the defendant agrees with the prosecution and the court ratifies the agreement by issuing a judgment of conformity.

A last-minute plea agreement may be the result of a deliberate negotiation strategy —in which the defence has increased its bargaining position as the trial date approached— or may respond to a last-minute evaluation of the real prospects of the case. In any case, the decision to agree should never be made under the pressure of the moment nor without rigorous advice from the lawyer.

What happens after the suspension?

When the trial is suspended, the court must set a new date for its holding and notify all parties. The law establishes that the new scheduling must be made as soon as possible, although the reality of judicial scheduling means that this period may be much longer than desirable.

From the defence perspective, the suspension of the trial may be an opportunity to strengthen the defence strategy with the additional time available: review the case file, locate new witnesses, commission additional expert reports or prepare the defendant’s statement more thoroughly. Using that time intelligently may make a real difference in the outcome of the process.

It is also important to verify the status of any precautionary measures that may be in force: if the defendant is in pre-trial detention, the suspension of the trial may be a moment to request its review, especially if the time elapsed since its adoption has changed the circumstances that justified it. A good lawyer does not miss any opportunity to improve their client’s situation, even when the process suffers a setback such as a suspension.

Frequently asked questions

How many times can a trial be suspended?
The law does not establish a maximum number of suspensions for a trial, although the court must ensure that the process is not unduly delayed. In practice, some trials have been suspended on several occasions before finally being held. When suspensions are repeated and unjustified, and the delay is causing concrete harm to one of the parties —especially if the defendant is in pre-trial detention— it is possible to file appeals or claims for undue delay before the court itself or before higher courts.

Do the evidences taken before the suspension remain valid if the trial resumes before the same court?
In principle, yes. If the trial is interrupted once it has begun and resumes before the same court within a reasonable period, the evidence already taken may retain its validity and does not need to be repeated. However, if the time elapsed between suspension and resumption is very long —which may affect the court’s memory or lead to changes in its composition— the court may decide to repeat all or part of the evidence to ensure that its assessment is based on direct and updated knowledge.

Can the defendant request the suspension of the trial?
Yes. The defendant or their lawyer may request the suspension of the trial when there is a justified cause that prevents it: illness of the defendant or the lawyer, non-appearance of an essential witness proposed by the defence, need to carry out new evidence or any other circumstance that makes the holding of the trial on that date impossible or highly prejudicial. The request must be submitted as far in advance as possible and must be duly justified and documented. The court will decide whether the alleged cause is sufficient to justify the suspension.

What happens with the costs incurred if the trial is suspended for reasons beyond my control?
When the trial is suspended for reasons attributable to another party —for example, the unjustified non-appearance of a prosecution witness or of the defendant when the victim has requested the trial— it may be requested that the court orders costs against the party that caused the suspension. However, when the suspension is due to reasons beyond all parties —such as the accumulation of cases in the court— the costs incurred are borne by each party. In these cases, it is possible to explore avenues of claim against the Administration of Justice if the delay has caused specific and quantifiable damage.

Can the suspension of the trial affect the statute of limitations of the offence?
Once the criminal process has reached the trial stage, the statute of limitations of the offence is interrupted. The opening of the proceedings and the acts of the process —including the scheduling of the trial and its possible suspensions— keep the criminal action alive and prevent the offence from becoming time-barred. Therefore, one or several suspensions of the trial do not imply that the offence will become time-barred nor that the case will be dismissed due to the mere passage of time. The statute of limitations could only operate if the process were completely and unjustifiably paralysed for a very prolonged period, which in practice is an exceptional situation.