Concept and Definition of Multiple Offenses
Multiple offenses is a central concept in criminal law and refers to the simultaneous prosecution of several legally independent criminal acts committed by an offender in multiple, separate actions. In Germany, multiple offenses are regulated in the Criminal Code (StGB) under Section 53. The legal distinction is made particularly in relation to the concept of ideal concurrence or unity of offense according to Section 52 StGB. The distinction between these forms of concurrence has a direct impact on sentencing and the subsequent enforcement of the sentence.
Multiple offenses always exist when an offender, through several separate actions, fulfills the elements of different criminal offenses. In other words, there are several independent acts. Each act stands on its own and has its own degree of unlawfulness and culpability. Consequently, a separate individual sentence is imposed for each act. Only in the next step does the court decide, according to which rules these sentences are combined.
Distinction: Multiple Offenses versus Unity of Offense
Criteria for Distinction
The distinction between multiple offenses (Section 53 StGB) and unity of offense (Section 52 StGB) is a central issue in the dogmatics of criminal law. While multiple offenses consist of several actions, i.e., separate criminal acts, unity of offense involves a single act through which several criminal offenses are violated at the same time.
Multiple Actions
Multiple offenses require that there be clearly separable events and an independent resolve for each offense. This means that each offense prosecuted as part of multiple offenses represents a separate attack on the legal order.
Individual Act versus Overall Event
In contrast, in unity of offense, a single act is central, violating several criminal statutes simultaneously. This is the case, for example, when an offender, by a single action, commits both theft and property damage.
Legal Consequences of Multiple Offenses
Formation of the Aggregate Sentence
The decisive legal consequence of multiple offenses is that a separate individual sentence is first imposed for each act. Subsequently, the court forms an aggregate sentence by resolution pursuant to Section 54 StGB. This is based on the so-called ‘asperation principle’: the highest individual sentence is maintained and the other sentences are partially added (usually as an additional penalty, which, however, may not reach the sum of the individual sentences).
Sentencing Range
The aggregate sentence must not exceed the sum of the individual sentences. Likewise, it must not exceed the statutory maximum for the relevant type of penalty (e.g., imprisonment). The minimum sentence is determined by the highest individual sentence.
Special Significance When Penalties Are of Different Types
If the individual sentences are of different types (such as a fine and imprisonment), the most severe type of penalty generally forms the basis for the aggregate sentence. In criminal law practice, this typically means that the aggregate prison sentence is the standard case in situations of multiple offenses.
Practical Examples and Case Groups
Classic Case Groups
- Multiple thefts on different days
- A burglary and an independent case of bodily injury
- Fraudulent acts committed against several victims, separated by time and place
Several offenses within a natural unit of action
In so-called natural units of action (e.g., a fight carried out as a single event resulting in multiple bodily injuries), there is no multiple offense but rather unity of offense, even if multiple criminal outcomes occur.
Procedural Particularities
Formation of Aggregate Sentence after Multiple Convictions
According to Section 55 StGB, it is possible to form an aggregate sentence from several final judgments (so-called subsequent aggregate sentencing) if the requirements of multiple offenses are met and the offenses were committed before the first conviction.
Questions of Enforcement Law
The distinction between multiple offenses is particularly relevant for the enforcement of the sentence, especially regarding measures of rehabilitation and the imposition of suspended sentences. It can also impact the suspension of the sentence on probation and the crediting of pre-trial detention.
International Aspects
The regulations governing multiple offenses are comparatively strict and systematically codified in German law. In other legal systems, such as Anglo-American law, there is often no formal distinction between multiple and unity of offenses. Instead, the judge decides on the combination or separation of sentences based on general considerations of equity.
Importance of Multiple Offenses in Legal Practice
The correct application and interpretation of the concept of multiple offenses has significant impact on the outcome of a criminal proceeding. It largely determines the amount of the penalty and the question of whether an aggregate sentence or several individual sentences are to be enforced. It is also the basis for numerous decisions by the Federal Court of Justice. It is especially relevant in sentencing practice, in the subsequent formation of aggregate sentences, and also in the criminological and political discussion on general prevention.
Literature and Further References
The understanding and legal treatment of multiple offenses are the subject of numerous textbooks and commentaries in criminal law. Particularly important are standard works in the general part of criminal law as well as leading decisions of the Federal Court of Justice, which regularly clarify the dogmatic distinction and practical cases of multiple offenses.
Conclusion
Multiple offenses is a central institution of German criminal law and regulates the handling of several crimes committed by the same offender in different actions. The differentiated legal treatment has a significant influence on the level of the penalty and on the type of enforcement. Correct distinction from unity of offense and the corresponding application of statutory provisions are of fundamental importance for judicial sentencing, the further proceedings, and the subsequent enforcement of the sentence.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are the legal requirements for multiple offenses?
In cases of multiple offenses (so-called real concurrence), there must be several legally independent actions, each fulfilling the offense elements of one or more criminal statutes, without any action being subsumed by another or being in unity of offense. It is crucial that there is no natural or evaluative unit of action between the individual acts. The distinction from unity of offense, where several criminal statutes are fulfilled either by one act or by several simultaneous acts, is central. The key is a single, self-contained act, in which no synonymous offense elements are met. Legally, multiple offenses require that there are several unlawful acts that can be separated from one another, each of which is punishable in itself and cannot be attributed to a single overall act.
How is sentencing determined in cases of multiple offenses?
Sentencing in cases of multiple offenses is based on the cumulative principle provided for in this scenario under Section 53 StGB. The court imposes a separate sentence for each individual act but then derives an aggregate sentence from these individual sentences, known as an aggregate prison or aggregate monetary penalty, with the benefits applicable under Section 54 StGB (e.g., combining several individual sentences under the asperation principle) being applied. The total penalties must not exceed the sum of the individual sentences and must always remain within the statutory sentencing ranges. An exception applies if there are compelling reasons to consider aggravating or mitigating factors pertaining to individual sentences.
How is multiple offenses distinguished from unity of offense?
The distinction is made based on whether there is a single action or multiple actions. If there are multiple offenses, these are isolated actions separated in time and substance, each with its own harm or attack on the protected legal interest. Unity of offense is present when, through one action, several criminal statutes are violated simultaneously or the same statute is violated multiple times. The differentiation typically focuses on the degree of unlawfulness and culpability as well as the presence of a natural unit of action. Relevant criteria include the temporal and spatial connection and the internal link between the individual acts.
How does multiple offenses affect ancillary penalties such as driving bans or confiscation?
In cases of multiple offenses, ancillary penalties are generally reviewed for each individual offense and can be imposed for each act. However, within the aggregate sentencing process according to Section 54 StGB, certain ancillary penalties, such as the imposition of a driving ban or confiscation of criminal tools, are often only imposed once if they can have effects beyond each act. Here too, the determining factors are the circumstances of the offending acts and the connection between them, as each ancillary penalty must be justified separately if it is attributable to different offenses.
What impact do multiple offenses have on criminal proceedings and the bringing of charges?
In criminal proceedings, the existence of multiple offenses means that every single offense must be specified and individualized in the indictment. The indictment must set out each element of each individual offense and the corresponding actions precisely and must separate them to allow for a clear distinction of the respective charges. In the judgment, the court must determine each action and its legal evaluation separately and must explicitly state the individual sentences imposed and the aggregate sentence formed. This results in an increased need for justification and greater diligence in recording and evaluating the events in the proceedings.
What is the significance of the so-called asperation principle in aggregate sentencing in cases of multiple offenses?
The asperation principle governs, in the context of multiple offenses, that the aggregate sentence is usually set above the highest individual sentence, but not by the sum of all additional individual sentences. The aggregate sentence is thus determined with due consideration of the total unlawfulness of all adjudicated acts, but in such a way that excessiveness is avoided. The court has discretion in its precise application and must consider all relevant culpability factors (such as commission of the act, conduct after the act, prior life of the offender).
Can offenses adjudicated at a later time still be added to an existing aggregate sentence?
According to Section 55 StGB, it is possible to include newly adjudicated offenses in an already imposed aggregate sentence, provided that the new offense was committed before the first conviction and thus could have been considered in the cumulative sentencing. In this case, a subsequent aggregate sentence is formed, and previous legal consequences, especially already enforced penalties, are credited. This approach provides for consistent sanctioning and prevents excessive punishment of the same offender for multiple offenses that, for procedural reasons, were sentenced separately.
