Confusion of Sentences: What Happens When the Heaviest Sentence Disappears?

Imagine: you are a landlord in Châteaulin, and a tenant has caused a fire in your building. He is sentenced to several prison terms for different offences. The court orders the confusion of the sentences (i.e., he only serves the longest one). But if that longest sentence is later reduced or annulled, what becomes of the others? The answer is not intuitive: they 'revive' and must be fully served. This is what the Court of Cassation reminded in a judgment of 24 July 1968, a decision that continues to set precedent.

As a landlord, tenant or property professional, you are not directly concerned by criminal law… except when an incident, offence or dispute brings you into contact with prison sentences. For example, if a neighbour in Plouhinec is convicted for damage to your co-ownership property, and his main sentence is annulled, the other sentences remain. This decision sheds light on an overlooked mechanism: confusion of sentences is merely a measure of enforcement; it does not make them disappear.

So, should you be wary? Not necessarily, but it is crucial to understand that confusion of sentences (Article 5 of the Criminal Code) does not erase them: it simply puts them to sleep as long as the heaviest sentence is being served. As soon as that sentence disappears, the others regain full effect. That is what we will break down together.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

This case begins with a classic conviction. A man is tried for several offences committed in Paris. On 27 May 1966, the Paris Court of Appeal sentenced him to four years' imprisonment for a first offence and thirty months' imprisonment for a second. The court ordered the confusion of sentences: the defendant would therefore only serve the heaviest sentence, i.e., four years. So far, nothing unusual.

But the Principal Public Prosecutor at the Paris Court of Appeal appealed to the Court of Cassation. Why? Because, in his view, confusion of sentences should not have the effect of making the lighter sentence disappear. He argued that if the four-year sentence were to be annulled or come to an end (for example through parole or a pardon), the thirty months' imprisonment should be served in full.

The Court of Cassation agreed with him. In its judgment of 24 July 1968, it quashed the Court of Appeal's decision and clarified the meaning of confusion of sentences: it only affects the enforcement, not the existence of the sentences. The conflated sentences remain 'whole' and must be served if the heaviest sentence disappears, up to the legal maximum for the most serious offence.

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The Court of Cassation relied on Article 5 of the Criminal Code (in its version then in force). This article provides that in the case of multiple convictions for separate facts, the sentences may be conflated, i.e., served simultaneously up to the highest sentence. But the Court specified that this confusion is merely an enforcement measure: it does not absorb the lighter sentences, it simply puts them on hold.

Concretely, the High Court distinguishes two things: on the one hand, the separate existence of each sentence (they are pronounced by a judgment and remain valid as long as they are not annulled); on the other, their enforcement (the time when the convicted person serves them). Confusion only affects enforcement. If the heaviest sentence disappears (for example, because it is quashed on appeal, or because the convicted person is pardoned), the other sentences, which have never ceased to exist, must be served.

The Court added a limit: this enforcement cannot exceed the legal maximum provided for the most serious offence. In other words, even if several sentences 'revive', the total duration of detention cannot exceed what the law authorises for the most serious offence. This is a safeguard for the convicted person.

This judgment is a confirmation of previous case law. It does not create new law, but it forcefully reminds a principle often misunderstood. The judges insist that confusion is not an amnesty (which erases the conviction) nor a pardon (which remits the sentence). It is a simple enforcement modality.

What This Changes for You — Practically

You are a landlord in Châteaulin? Imagine your tenant has been convicted for wilful damage (three months' imprisonment) and for non-payment of rent (one month's imprisonment). The court orders confusion: your tenant only serves three months' imprisonment (the heaviest). But if those three months are annulled on appeal, the three months' imprisonment for damage 'revive'. Your tenant will then have to serve those three months, which could cause him to lose his job and jeopardise future rent payments.

You are a buyer in Plouhinec? Before buying a property, check whether the seller or an occupant has been subject to criminal convictions relating to the property (for example, for drug trafficking). If several sentences have been conflated, an annulment of the heaviest sentence could disrupt the occupation of the premises, and therefore your peace of mind.

In a co-ownership, if a co-owner is convicted for noise nuisance (suspended prison sentence) and for damage (immediate imprisonment), the confusion of sentences may give the illusion that everything is settled. But if the immediate sentence is annulled, the suspended sentence may become enforceable. It is therefore necessary to follow the evolution of criminal decisions to anticipate problems.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Keep all judgments and orders: in case of multiple convictions, request a copy of each decision. Do not rely on a single extract of sentence. The court registry can provide you with a complete record.
• Check the criminal record: if you are the victim of an offence (theft, damage), the convicted person's criminal record lists all sentences, even conflated. This allows you to know whether other sentences may 'revive'.
• Include contractual clauses: in a lease, insert a clause specifying that any criminal conviction related to the property (damage, neighbourhood disturbance) constitutes a ground for automatic termination. Thus, if the sentence is annulled, you retain a lever.
• Monitor appeals: if the convicted person appeals or lodges an appeal in cassation, be vigilant. An annulment of the heaviest sentence may revive lighter sentences. Inquire with the opposing party's lawyer or the public prosecutor's office.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This 1968 decision is part of a consistent line of the Court of Cassation. As early as 1955, a judgment of the Criminal Chamber had stated that 'confusion of sentences does not extinguish them, it only suspends their enforcement' (Crim., 23 June 1955). More recently, the Criminal Chamber recalled that 'confusion of sentences has effect only during the duration of the heaviest sentence; once that sentence ceases, the other sentences resume their course' (Crim., 12 January 2005, No. 04-82.456).

The trend is therefore clear: judges want to avoid confusion being used as an 'eraser' of sentences. This means that, for victims of offences, it is essential not to consider confusion as an end in itself. The convicted person may still have to serve other sentences if the main one disappears. Conversely, for convicted persons, it is important to be aware that confusion is only a respite: if the base sentence is annulled, the other sentences will catch up.

This case law remains relevant, even after the reform of the Criminal Code in 1994. Article 132-3 of the new Criminal Code reiterates the same principle: 'Confusion of sentences may only be ordered within the limits of the highest legal maximum'. The logic is identical.

In Practice: What to Do

FAQ:

• What if I am a victim and the convicted person benefits from a confusion of sentences? Do not be discouraged: confusion is not final. Monitor appeals and, if the heaviest sentence is annulled, contact your lawyer to request enforcement of the other sentences.
• Can I demand that the convicted person serve all his sentences? No, confusion is legal and ordered by the judge. But you can challenge it if it is illegal (for example if it exceeds the legal maximum).
• What are the time limits for action? In criminal matters, appeals are short: 10 days for an appeal, 5 days for cassation. Be reactive.
• What is the cost? A consultation with a specialised lawyer costs between €150 and €300. But legal proceedings may be covered by legal aid if your resources are modest.
• Can I obtain damages even if the sentence is conflated? Yes, confusion of sentences only concerns imprisonment. Compensation for your loss (material or moral) remains due and can be claimed before the civil judge.

Are you in a similar situation? A first 30-minute consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) can save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →