Continuing Offenses, Ongoing Offenses, and Mass Offenses

Quick Overview

A continuing offense means that the perpetrator commits multiple separate acts that are interconnected by intent, method of execution, timing, and the object of the offense. A continuing offense consists of maintaining an unlawful state of affairs, such as when someone restricts another person’s freedom over a long period of time. A mass offense requires a large number of similar acts, such as the hoarding of weapons or ammunition. Correctly distinguishing between these categories affects not only the sentence but also the defense, the statute of limitations, and the determination of whether a single offense or multiple separate acts have been committed.

If the police suspect you of repeated offenses or you are facing criminal prosecution, do not wait for another interrogation. We will help you assess how your actions may be legally classified and advise you on which defense strategy to choose.

From a temporal perspective, we distinguish three specific categories of crimes: mass crimes, continuing crimes, and the continuation of a crime.

Mass Crimes

There is no statutory definition of a mass crime. However, this category includes specific types of crimes that require a large number of similar acts carried out with a single intent. These acts do not necessarily have to constitute the same criminal offense.

An example is the crime of illegal possession of weapons. The law stipulates that anyone who hoards, manufactures, or procures for themselves or another person weapons or a significant quantity of ammunition shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of six months to five years.

Thus, there is a clearly defined requirement regarding the hoarding and manufacturing of weapons or ammunition in significant quantities. If you were to manufacture just one weapon, it would still constitute the crime of illegal possession of weapons, but the penalty would be lower (specifically, imprisonment for two years, a ban on certain activities, or forfeiture of the item).

Mr. Novák and Ms. Milá serve as examples of both types of penalties. Mr. Novák decided to make a firearm at home without the proper permit. He wanted something for self-defense. Unlike Mr. Novák, Ms. Milá made her first firearm simply out of curiosity. However, she began to enjoy it very much and so started manufacturing them on a large scale.

In this case, Mr. Novák will receive a more lenient sentence, which includes imprisonment for up to two years, a ban on certain activities, or forfeiture of the weapon. This is because, even though it involves only one weapon, he still committed the crime of illegal possession of a firearm. Ms. Milá, on the other hand, faces a harsher sentence of imprisonment ranging from six months to five years, because she manufactured and stockpiled firearms in significant quantities.

From legal practice, we know that in cases involving mass offenses, disputes often arise precisely over the scope of the conduct. It is not enough to simply state that there were “more” items. Law enforcement authorities must prove that the quantity, the manner in which the items were obtained, and the circumstances of the case actually correspond to a more severe legal classification.

Continuing Offense

Even continuing offenses do not have a legally defined definition. However, they constitute a group of crimes involving the maintenance of an unlawful state of affairs, rather than merely its short-term creation (for example, locking someone in a school locker for a few seconds—especially if done as a joke—would not be characterized as a restriction of personal liberty). Thus, this may involve a situation where the perpetrator commits a crime, thereby creating an unlawful state, and subsequently maintains that state; or the perpetrator may not even commit a crime, but merely maintain an unlawful state that arose without their involvement.

An important aspect, therefore, is continuity, not individual acts. In the case of a continuing offense, it is regarded as a single offense.

An example is the crime of deprivation of personal liberty. According to the Criminal Code, this is committed by anyone who, without authorization, prevents another person from exercising their personal liberty. The key word here is “prevents,” which expresses a continuing state of affairs. Kidnapping in and of itself is a criminal offense, but if the perpetrator continues to hold the person captive, it constitutes a continuing offense because they are maintaining the unlawful state of restriction of personal liberty.

In practice, it is often important in the case of continuing offenses to determine precisely when the unlawful state began and when it ended. It is precisely this moment that can affect the statute of limitations, the applicable legal provisions, and the scope of criminal liability. Therefore, not every brief or ambiguous infringement of another person’s rights automatically constitutes a continuing offense.

Continuation of a Criminal Offense

The Criminal Code defines continuation of a criminal offense as conduct in which the individual acts, carried out with a single intent, fulfill—even if only in the aggregate— constitute the elements of the same criminal offense, are linked by the same or a similar method of commission, and are closely related in terms of time and the subject matter of the offense.

In practice, this refers to a situation in which a person commits individual acts or deeds that, on their own, could be considered separate criminal offenses but are carried out as part of a single, connected, intentional course of conduct. The key elements of this concept are:

• Unified intent: The person has a single intent or goal that they seek to achieve through repeated acts.
• Similar method of execution: Each of these individual acts is committed in a similar manner, which may include the same procedure, tools, or techniques.
• Close temporal connection: The individual acts are committed within a short period of time, making it clear that they are not separate events but a connected series of acts.
• Connection in the Target of the Offense: All individual acts are directed at a similar target, object, or subject.

An example would be a situation in which a person commits a series of thefts at the same store, using a similar method and with a close time interval between the individual acts. For example:

• Day 1: The person enters the store and steals a cell phone worth 5,000 crowns.
• Day 2: The person visits the store again and steals a tablet worth 7,000 crowns.
• Day 3: The person returns to the store and steals a smartwatch worth 3,000 crowns.

From our practice: A client was suspected of several property crimes that the police initially classified as a continuing criminal offense. It was crucial for the defense to demonstrate that the individual incidents were not sufficiently connected in terms of timing or intent and that they did not constitute a premeditated series of attacks. In such cases, therefore, the attorney always examines not only the amount of damage but also the motivation, the time intervals between incidents, the method of execution, and whether the evidence actually demonstrates a unified plan.

Although each theft could be considered a separate criminal offense (theft) on its own, it could be argued that this constitutes a continuing criminal offense. This is because the individual thefts are carried out with a common intent (to steal goods), in a similar manner (entering the store, taking the goods), and are temporally linked (the thefts occur in the same store at short intervals).

If the individual thefts were considered separately, each would constitute only a misdemeanor, since the value of the individual items does not reach the 10,000-koruna threshold for criminal damage. However, because they are considered collectively, this constitutes a criminal offense, specifically a continuing criminal offense.

In cases of a continuing criminal offense, it is often crucial for the defense to challenge the existence of a single intent, a temporal connection, or a similar method of execution. If it can be shown that the individual acts were not sufficiently connected, this may affect both the legal classification of the offense and the severity of the sentence. In such a situation, it is advisable to consult with an attorney before being questioned or providing a statement.

Are you unsure whether the police are correctly classifying your actions as a single crime, a continuing offense, or several separate offenses? Send us a description of the situation and the case documents. An attorney will assess what arguments can be used in your defense and how to proceed in the next phase of the criminal proceedings.

Summary

The distinction between a collective offense, a continuing offense, and a continuing criminal conduct is of fundamental importance for legal classification, sentencing, the statute of limitations, and defense strategy. A multiple offense requires a greater number of acts or objects, typically in cases such as illegal possession of weapons. A continuing offense consists of maintaining an unlawful state of affairs, such as the restriction of personal liberty. A continuing offense consists of multiple separate acts linked by a common intent, a similar method of commission, a temporal connection, and the same or a similar object of the offense. In practice, making the correct distinction can determine whether damages are cumulative, whether a single crime or multiple acts are involved, and what arguments can be used in a defense.