Lott v. United States

Background

Three employees-officers of a company were indicted for trying to evade their corporate income taxes. They entered pleas of nolo contendere (they would not contest the charges) on March 17, 1959, but the judge delayed sentencing until related trials finished. The court orally pronounced judgment and sentences on June 19, and formal judgments were filed June 22. The defendants filed motions in arrest of judgment on June 23; those motions were denied July 13. The defendants appealed on July 15 and July 17, and the court of appeals dismissed the appeals as untimely under the federal criminal rules.

Reasoning

The main question was when the time for filing motions and appeals begins: at the court’s acceptance of a nolo plea or at the later pronouncement and entry of judgment. The Court held that the “determination of guilt” in Rule 34 is the court’s judgment and sentence, not the earlier acceptance of a nolo plea. The majority explained that a nolo plea is an admission of the facts but does not itself dispose of the case and can be withdrawn before sentence, so the timing rules should run from judgment. Because the motions were filed within five days after judgment and the appeals followed after denial, the Court found the appeals timely and reversed.

Real world impact

The decision makes it clearer that defendants who enter nolo contendere pleas will have the running time for certain post-conviction motions measured from the court’s judgment and sentence, not from the plea date. That change affects how defense lawyers calendar critical deadlines and may revive appeals previously considered late. The Court also declined to resolve broader inconsistencies among the rules, suggesting rule-makers should address them.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued that accepting a nolo plea has long been treated as a determination of guilt and that the majority’s ruling departs from established practice and could create confusion about filing deadlines.