Kemp v. United States

Background

A federal prisoner, Dexter Kemp, was convicted of drug and gun crimes and sentenced in 2011. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed his convictions and sentences in November 2013. Kemp did not seek further review, and two codefendants’ rehearing petitions were denied in May 2014. Kemp filed a motion in April 2015 to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. §2255, which the District Court dismissed as untimely because his judgment had become final earlier. In June 2018 Kemp asked the court to reopen the §2255 proceedings under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), arguing the one‑year clock should have started later because of his codefendants’ rehearing denials.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether the word “mistake” in Rule 60(b)(1) covers a judge’s legal errors. Writing for the majority, Justice Thomas concluded that it does, based on the rule’s text, structure, and history, including the 1946 removal of the word “his” and contemporary dictionary meanings. The Court rejected narrower readings that would limit “mistake” to only obvious legal errors or only non‑judicial mistakes. Because Kemp’s motion alleged a judicial legal error, it fell under Rule 60(b)(1), was subject to the rule’s one‑year constraint, and the court held the motion untimely.

Real world impact

People seeking to reopen final federal civil judgments for a judge’s legal error will generally need to bring their claims under Rule 60(b)(1) and meet its one‑year time limit, while also satisfying the rule’s “within a reasonable time” requirement. The Court did not eliminate Rule 60(b)(6): Justice Sotomayor emphasized that the catchall remains available in extraordinary circumstances, such as a clear change in controlling law.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Sotomayor concurred to stress that Rule 60(b)(6) and the reasonable‑time standard remain available for extraordinary cases. Justice Gorsuch dissented, urging that the Court should have left this policy issue to the rulemaking process.