United States v. Barber

Background

Two men named in an indictment—James T. Barber and Sumner G. Moon—were accused of plotting to get large parcels of public timber land in Idaho for a private lumber company by arranging third parties to apply for the land. Four counts were returned; the government asked to drop three counts and the trial court sustained a time‑bar defense to the fourth, dismissing that count. The defendants had filed written pleas claiming the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations and labeled those pleas as pleas in abatement.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether defendants could stop prosecution of a charged continuing conspiracy by filing a special, written statute‑of‑limitations plea. The justices relied on prior authority that when an indictment expressly alleges the conspiracy continued up to the indictment’s filing, the proper response is to deny that allegation in open court through the ordinary plea, not by a separate special plea. Because the fourth count alleged a continuing conspiracy, the Court found the special plea procedure improper and held the trial court erred in sustaining that plea.

Real world impact

The ruling means prosecutors alleging ongoing conspiracies cannot be defeated by a special written limitations plea; defendants must contest the allegation through the regular plea or at trial. The Supreme Court reversed the trial judgment so the government may proceed further on the conspiracy charge, and the ultimate guilt or innocence remains to be decided in later proceedings.