Document: 517 U.S. 416116 S.Ct. 1460134 L.Ed.2d 613 CARLISLEv.UNITED STATESCertiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for Sixth Circuit. No. 94-9247. Supreme Argued January 16, 1996 Decided April 29, Syllabus At his trial on a federal marijuana charge, petitioner filed motion judgment acquittal under Federal Rule Criminal Procedure District granted even though it was one day outside time limit prescribed by 29(c), which provides, inter alia, that "[i]f jury returns verdict guilty . ., may be made or renewed within 7 days after is discharged such further as court fix during 7-day period." In reversing and remanding reinstatement sentencing, Circuit held 29 district has no jurisdiction grant an untimely acquittal, enter sua sponte submission case jury. Held: The had authority petitioner's 29(c) limit. Pp. 3-18. (a) Rules do not permit granting postverdict acquittal. 29(c)'s text, when read with 45(b)'s statement "the extend taking any action Rul[e] except extent conditions stated in [the Rule]," plain unambiguous: If, this case, returned, must filed, either seven jury's discharge, extended period fixed period. Furthermore, light clarity, cannot rely 2, requires ambiguous "be construed secure simplicity procedure, fairness administration elimination unjustifiable expense delay," 57, allows courts discretion regulate practice there controlling law. 3-9. (b) This rejects invocation courts' "inherent supervisory power" alternative Court's action. Whatever scope inherent power formulate procedural rules specifically required Constitution Congress, does include develop circumvent conflict Procedure. See, e.g., Bank Nova Scotia v. States, 487 U. S. 250, 254-255. Whether described motion, entry filing cautionary principle will lightly assume mean depart from established principles apply because prior enactment long, unquestioned acquit insufficient evidence sponte, return verdict. 9-13. (c) also remaining arguments: (1) order All Writs Act, 28 C. Section(s) 1651, through writ coram nobis; (2) failure allow would violate Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause; (3) prohibiting only late lead needless appeals habeas corpus proceedings. 13-14. (d) rebuts arguments put forward dissent, including proposition permissive withdraw pre-existing powers, dissent's reliance precedents support existence invokes. 15-18. 48 F. 3d 190, affirmed. Scalia, J., delivered opinion Court, Rehnquist, O'Connor, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, JJ., joined. concurring opinion. opinion, Souter Stevens, dissenting Kennedy, NOTICE: subject formal revision before publication preliminary print Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Washington, D.C. 20543, typographical other errors, corrections goes press. Justice Scalia Court. 1 presents question whether 2 * Petitioner Charles Carlisle, along several co-defendants, tried Western Michigan conspiracy possess intent distribute marijuana, violation 21 841, 846, 84 Stat. 1260, 1265. He did move 29(a). On July 13, 1993, returned discharged. 23, Carlisle "Motion Judgment Acquittal Pursuant 29(c)," arguing sustain conviction. App. 6-9. provides "a Excluding intermediate Saturday Sunday (as 45(a) requires), ended 22, 1993. States' response Carlisle's argued should denied and, alternatively, sufficient August 19, Its written address timeliness issue, but concluded rational trier fact find beyond reasonable doubt knew about, knowingly voluntarily joined, charged conspiracy. 3 When appeared sentencing October 14, announced its ruling. decision August, said, prepared two opinions, denying now decided substitute former latter. subsequently entered (i) withdrew (ii) "Carlisle's accompanying prove joined marijuana. footnote, acknowledged late, concluded: 4 ". I can conceive prejudice result consideration lat[e] case. Because believe refusal hear grave injustice, [Rule 29(c)] permits deadline, consider if were timely manner." Id., at 37. 5 reversed remanded sentencing. It been submitted 192 (1995). We certiorari. II 6 argues "should given go strict limits legally innocent, attorney error. Brief 8. seeks root argument in, among places, reproduced entirety margin.1 45(b) whereas certain acts accorded validity upon showing excusable neglect, Rule]." These unambiguous. There simply room text post-verdict regardless accompanied claim legal innocence, 8 Unable offer reading granted, contends 29(a) gives 29(a), entitled Before Submission Jury," relevant part: 9 "The defendant own shall more offenses indictment information side closed conviction offense offenses." 10 quite surprise court's hidden away provision Jury." inclined adopt interpretation creates unless exceed caption clear. Here, contrary, structure indicates subsection limited says. 11 Petitioner's proposed create odd system defense counsel could linger. Smith, 331 469 (1947), we declined 33, placed 5-day making new trial, "permit[ting] judge retrial without request time," S., 473. "[I]t strange rule," "which deprived what asked person most concerned, yet allowed him act petition," arrangement "would almost certainly judges private application friends convicted," id., 474, 475. same true here.2 addition, makes farce reserve decide need procedure if, reserving, continuing own. sum, captions (and fortiori them) clear subsections pertain motions submission, discharge. 12 Government offers alternate theory 29: refers both "motion defendant" "own motion," motion" simpliciter, latter refer defendants courts, permitting "motions" plausible. acquittal" provide, second third sentences: "If set aside If acquittal." phrase "on notably absent sentence-conveying idea that, where verdict, cannot. But includes taken initiative, limiting sentence effect, returned. That say, inclusion inexplicable.3 13 vests provides: 14 "These intended provide just determination every criminal proceeding. They delay." 15 aid petitioner. sets forth used construing rules, law superseding achieve objectives. not, something than they plainly say-which construction require. 16 acknowledge precedent using basis deviating imposed Fallen 378 139 (1964), cited course excusing incarcerated paraplegic pro se comply notice appeal 37(a). Concluding "had done all reasonably expected" file appeal, mailing clerk's office due, "decline[d] so rigidly bar merits." 144. obsolete amendment 37(a).4 And narrow ruling announced, evident Berman 530 (1964) (per curiam), Fallen, summarily affirming dismissal late. 17 Finally, 57 source version effect proceedings against commenced he relied oral argument) states, part, "[i]n cases provided rule, their manner inconsistent these rules." portion current captioned "Procedure Is No Controlling Law," "A consistent law, local district." Fed. Crim. Proc. 57(b). controls present neither authorizes here. A rule party submit prevail "inconsistent" (or "consistent") 29's limit; "not for" 29; "controlling law" governing question. III 18 As action, invokes power." 9. have recognized "may, limits, Congress." Hasting, 461 499, 505 (1983). power," however, 254-255 (1988), holding invoke 52(a): "federal disregard Rule's mandate constitutional statutory provisions." here contradicted language effectively annulled 19 Chambers NASCO, Inc., 501 32, 47 (1991), said "`lightly Congress principles' (quoting Weinberger Romero-Barcelo, 456 305, 313 (1982)). Similarly, Link Wabash R. Co., 370 626, 629-632 (1962), since dismiss lack prosecution "sanction wide usage," assume, absence expression, Civil 41(b), prosecution, abrogated "long unquestioned" power. clarity unaware Indeed, aware asserting dictum McCracken, 26 Cas. 1069, 1069 (No. 15,664) (ED Va. 1878); Hayden, 236, 238 15,333) (NDNY 1877).5 20 relies establish contravention applicable Rules. Gaca 411 618 (1973) reinstated dismissed want suggestion contrary statute procedure. Nobles, 422 225 (1975), approved exercise disclosure witness statements, felt necessary make sure 16. best Thompson INS, 375 384 which, 73(a), gave 60 judgment. Thompson, pertinent here, expressly "`unique circumstances,'" cause meet deadline erroneous assurance itself. 387 Harris Truck Lines, Inc. Cherry Meat Packers, 371 215, 217 (1962) curiam)). IV three detain us long. First, nobis. Apart purport issuing, nobis, lain traditionally available bring factual errors "material regularity proceeding itself," defendant's being age having died See Mayer, 235 55, 67-68 (1914). Moreover, "[t]he Act residual issue writs otherwise covered statute. Where addresses particular hand, authority, controlling." Pennsylvania Bureau Correction Marshals Service, 474 34, 43 (1985). noted few years Procedure, "it difficult situation today [a nobis] appropriate." 475, n. 4. 22 Secondly, asserts Clause Amendment. His point consists nothing bald assertions applied facts transgresses fundamental fairness, "shocks conscience," interferes rights "implicit concept ordered liberty." 28-29 (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Herrera Collins, 506 390 (1993); Rochin California, 342 165, 172 (1952); Palko Connecticut, 302 319, 325-326 (1937)). failed proffer historical, textual, precedential inability violates Amendment, decline fashion due process right out thin air. 23 Thirdly, proceedings, obtain relief directed court. Assuming arguendo contentions accurate, them alter our analysis, liberty ignore "optimal" policy results. Cf. Robinson, 361 220, 229-230 (1960). similarly unmoved contention "rationale" mere eight trial. behind later justice equity demand. involving Land Policy Management 1976, 1744 (1988 ed.): 1-day filings acceptable, 10-day might equally cascade exceptions engulf erected deadline; cutoff line set, some individuals always fall it." Locke, 471 84, 101 V. 24 respond many dissent. dissent sweeping assertion clearly ensure innocent wrongfully post, 7. Perhaps so. itself recognizes, come end once taken. Post, 17-19. accord, then, rendered powerless disagreement between comes down cosmic timing-which answered 29. 25 effort explain why, event unnecessary, sense impose it, maintains untimeliness it. 10-11. disedifying prospect vested 7, exercising let convicted. Quite obviously, explanation incompatible premise underlies entire argument. concern, runs afoul 2's delay": see simplicity, nor delay regime discretionary entertained. "permissive powers." 17. really since, discussed, judgments "pre-existing supra, 10-12 5. besides predicate proposes produce extraordinary consequences. For example, illustrate, 4-5, previously trials sponte. ." Following logic, permissive, preclude thereby leaving open well Double Jeopardy Clause. Adivisory Committee's Notes 1966 Amendment App., p. 801 ("The amendments first sentences defendant. Problems double jeopardy arise motion"). practice, one, subpoena served minor despite 17(d) ("A marshal, deputy marshal who less age"); another take over disabled 25(a) ("If whom unable proceed regularly sitting assigned finish trial"); correct technical error imposition sentence, arithmetical, technical, error"). 27 decisions Harlan eliminate powers germane. discussed above, 10. Ohio Power 353 98, 104 (1957), proceeded assumption "affect [our own] Rules." involved departure rules-which not. Fernandez 81 Ct. 642 (1961), L. Ed. 2d 683 (Harlan, chambers), 46(a) "person arrested punishable death admitted bail" (emphasis added) revoke bail noncapital Fernandez, 644 2d, 685, What admitting implies respect revocation comparable motion. needs, context, "persons offenses" persons capital offenses. Of course, found. Sisson, 399 267 (1970), supports think Sisson "implicitly conclude" proper propriety irrelevant decision. appealed (proper improper), Government's 3731 (which acquittal) dismissed. Wilson, 420 332, 351 (1975) (appeal "was barred solely statute"). conclude 29(c). therefore affirm 30 ordered. 31 djq concurring. 32 Part Stevens persuasive authority" although, reasons offered majority, ante, 10, am persuaded extends event, accept received view generally legislative abrogation, (1988); although Congress's necessarily plenary, implicated While interference run Article III, 58 (1991) (Scalia, dissenting) ("Some elements essential `[t]he judicial Power,' Const., Art. 1, indefeasible"), seriously authority. join 33 Breyer join, 34 highlight features key my 35 anomalous classify prescriptions, rigid ones,6 heading "subject matter jurisdiction." basic requirement relates controversy status parties Wright, A. Miller, & E. Cooper, Practice 3522, 78 (2d ed. 1984); Restatement (Second) Judgments (1982) (defining jurisdiction" "authority [of court] adjudicate type action"); cf. Kember, 648 1354, 1357-1358 (CADC l980) curiam) (commenting "manifold settings employ term [jurisdiction]" distinguishing "jurisdiction" questions issues character); Center Nuclear Responsibility, Regulatory Comm'n, 781 935, 945, 1986) (Ginsburg, (questioning "profligate use" word "jurisdiction," diverse contexts, "to things-from appeal"). 36 concerns basic. prescription. prescription tight sure. precluding extensions, "excusable neglect," expiration specified like limitation periods generally, see, Irwin Department Veteran Affairs, 498 89, 95 (1990) ("[t]ime requirements lawsuits customarily `equitable tolling'"), 29(c)/45(b) constraint utterly exceptionless. 37 sharply honed exception misled have-and probably have-taken conveyed correct, rather incorrect, information. 384, 386-387 (had misinformed "in ample "could have, presumably original judgment, waiting, did, until disposed [new motion]"); 216-217 (instructing heard merits improperly grounded 14-day extension appeal); 4A Wright 1168, (describing Lines "based similar estoppel"). observes, "is here." 12. 38 action; rather, neglected follow instructions. "within Just clearly, excludes enlargement run. agree framed resist ad hoc relaxation. drawn point, unreasonable draw rulemakers 39 bears emphasis, finally, recognizes avenues still challenge sufficiency warrant conviction: (subject "plain error" standard); postconviction 2255, ineffective assistance counsel. 38-39. rare situations envisions-delay meritorious God, 18, those out-of-time rehearing petition, 15-these modes adequate corrective. 40 Kennedy joins, dissenting. 41 long retains prosecutor proved guilt. unsupported contingent therefore, acquittal; Rather, withdraws refrain entering knows innocent. 42 Viewed light, majority places negative implication bear. exists all, far too weak justify conclusion manifests desired Trial kept busy responding motions, objections requests litigants. wrong, referee whose advanced parties. Learned Hand tersely noted, "judge, least court, moderator; affirmatively securing fair intervene end, necessary." Brown Walter, 62 798, 799 (CA2 1933). duty encompasses avoidance occurs, correction occurred earlier 44 times. "power `inherent control parties, virtue process.' Arkadelphia Co. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. 249 134, 146. Northwestern Fuel Brock, 216, 219." Morgan, 307 183, 197 (1939). Although civil broader independently cases. Crawford 212 194 (1909). 45 Examples abundant jurisprudence.7 serving Ninth Circuit, then-Judge considering series various powers,8 correctly pointed out: 46 "Exercise orders sanctioned avert misfunction varied circumstances. Arizona Manypenny, 672 761, 765, cert. denied, 459 850 (1982). declines acquit, corrects averts misfunctioning. Given unquestionably convicted, acquittals guilty. exercised direct fails close evidence. Wiborg 163 632, 659 (1896); Cady 293 829 1923); Nosowitz 282 575, 578 1922).9 insufficiency Harding, 131, 136 15,301) Pa. 1846); Fullerton, 1225 15,176) (SDNY 1870); Wharton, Law 669 (1846) ("Where, authorize objection 643(s) (explaining reserves himself, improper conviction, arrest verdict"); State, Port. 107, 109-110 (Ala. 1836).10 49 Courts' longstanding entirely enters setting To sure, early reveal typically trials, acquittals, concluding supported However, subsequent demonstrate became concerned remedy trenched prohibition jeopardy, began acquittals. Ex parte 870, 878 (CA7 1939), aff'd divided Stone, 308 519 50 earliest involve appellate acquit. 575 1922); 334 1935); Reiner 92 823 (CA9 1937); France 164 676 (1897) (remanding directions judgment); Romano 522 1925) (same). Later Courts soon followed suit, reserved, preverdict 870 1939); Standard Oil Supp. 937 (WD Wis. 1938), Socony-Vacuum 310 150, (1940); State Meen, 171 (1920) (same); Advisory (endorsing practices). adoption 1944, explained "may should" review Ansley 135 207, 208 (1943). 51 history, lacks substance different directing ordering sensibly understood prohibit providing measure 469, (1947). thought needed reason wrongful exceedingly circumstance unforeseen accident results 52 events, enables keep altogether revise proof. particularly fathom considers Government, while 345 (1975). Not surprisingly, numerous passage possessed Hughes, 759 530, 532-536 Ark.), aff'd, sub nom. Haren, 952 190 (CA8 1991); DiBernardo, 880 1216, 1225, (CA11 1989); Coleman, 811 804 (CA3 1987); Giampa, 758 928, 936, 1985); 765; 208; Weinstein, 452 704, 713, 714 1971); Broadus, 664 592, 595-598 (DC 1987). 53 states pre-Rule establishes precise Ante, 11, unremarkable. dispute verdicts After adopted, raised remedy. 474. Since time, principled recent 54 error-correcting "`inherent parties,'" 197, kind Therefore, express indication implicitly attends initial jurisdiction, acquits 55 Acts investing try verdicts, occasion disagree errs relying do, strongly prohibits 56 "contradicted limit," text" suffices Ibid. assumes conclusory view, serves salutary purposes tension None frustrated coexist with, authorize, avoid imposing truly exceptional guilt wholly lacking. confirms affirmation way 764: "We mention `on motion' jury." Second, accommodates seek review. amended 1994 very purpose striking balance interests. 29(b), pp. 784-785. result, hardly undermine (b). interests obviously fully protected already 345.11 59 Third, promptly, firm recollection able expeditiously efficiently. reviewing transcript. Thus, judge's annuls deadline. Defendants bound limitation, thus useful function require reconsider explained: "Rule court; judgment." 764. nevertheless judges, instances, know argue acting inference draws words 7.12 Specifically, seizes "notabl[e] absen[ce]" Rule, 6, concludes omission "convey[s] cannot." 61 establishing evidence, 208, reads much into omission. explains discharge next vein, surely reflects draftsman's sensible patent redundancy cryptic change her acquittal.13 Common refutes compel. Under majority's reading, inefficient requiring collateral challenges unsupported. directs "shall ambiguity correcting challenged proceeding.14 63 reveals considered understand There, moved 34. 276. purported evidentiary grounds raise. 277, 6. sought pursuant 3731, permitted governmental arresting 279-280. 64 lacked termed "arres[t] [of] judgment," 288. Harlan's five Members equated comparison, "judges, juries, defendants." 290. 29(b) "expressly `returns guilty.'" 290; determined acted acquittal). 65 was. postjudgment mooted pending jurisdictionally-barred prevented Nevertheless, identify jurisdictional filed. mystified why deprive 66 Our reinforces implicit reached Sisson. recently explained, lower "`we intended'" interpretive suggests silence 67 Railroad 626 analysis. Link, rejected involuntary complaint, implication, precluded 68 41(b) implying restriction. Neither Rule-which merely defendant-nor abrogate calendars remained dormant inaction dilatoriness seeking relief. power,' governed manage affairs orderly expeditious disposition 630.15 69 petitions instructive. Such petitions, routinely never granted. appropriate deny petition occasions, interest even-handed outweighs finality authorized 70 980 (1956), initiative vacated following Term, petition. 98 (1957). dissented disposition, judgments" included 104. 71 decision, endorse use apparent Explaining denial bail, observed 642, 644, 683, (1961) (in chambers). doing so, exposed flaw accepted today. 72 46(a)(1) "`person bail,'" "authority, incident conduct them, progress justice." Ct., 645, 686 properly seemingly mandatory background afforded greater discretion. Ibid.; Anguilo, 755 969, 972 (CA1 1985) (Breyer, J.). authored holds attempt distinguish author. 73 powers.16 Smith draftsmen counsel, actually modify 74 committed Judge assert affirmed started serve sentence. arguable suggesting then 474; (1914).17 justified lawyer's expanded conducted. enlarge diminish either. 75 fact, takes note character Smith's months, easy Jackson's expressed concern give rise appearance impropriety, concerning possible ex approaches today's relies. relevance misplaced, represents highly inappropriate comment integrity judiciary. singularly bizarre half century ago thinks supports. "Smith indiscriminately context there"). 76 process.'" 197. survive expired. sufficient, enable refuse record contain 77 state procedures handling leave unaddressed initiative.18 comports sound historical commonsense likely innocent.19 brief final about practical significance holding. real danger burdened flood motions. possibility God denied. "absolutely vital defendants," Wiborg, 658, possibility, how remote, purports constrain reject adhere common understanding revealed 79 Accordingly, respectfully Motion "(a) Jury. Motions abolished place. government reserved right. "(b) Reservation Decision Motion. (where evidence), reserved. "(c) Discharge "(d) Same: Conditional Ruling Grant determine thereafter reversed, specifying determination. conditionally, thereon affect conditionally appellee denial, accordance court." forcefully compel reach effective rejoinder made. made-that considerations supporting here-the ignores discussing strangeness motion; transforms desire spare "private convicted" "appearance impropriety" "ex approaches" create, (though context) regards judiciary," ibid., says anyway. inexplicable precisely achieved (unlike theories) thereof period, allows). sole beneficiary textual contortions wants wit invite (if unavailable) later. hope belief exists. 37(a) "[u]pon neglect." (1966). replaced Appellate 4(b), transferred 4(b). 4(b) (1968). discussion produces lot smoke, fire. (CA5 1943), "establishing evidence," thing. noting appellants' renew said: "[T]he saved prevent miscarriage justice, examined found 208. obvious preserved appeal. deal (i.e., acquittal), 658-659 1836); preor Parte (1939); 937, 938-939 (D. 1924); 36, 38-39 (1920); reverse Nosowitz, 578; 823, 824-825 676, 680 (1897); 522, 524 1925). single here: apparently (1947) (suggesting raise concerns), 7-8. latent willing entitled-viz., acquittal-rather (listing "cause shown"). examples illustrate breadth "has suit doctrine forum non conveniens," Gulf Corp. Gilbert, 330 501, 502 (1947); fugitive, Molinaro New Jersey, 396 365, 366 (1970); enforce compliance lawful contempt, Shillitani 364, (1966); special conferences complex antitrust Gypsum 340 76, (1950); stay maintain processes justice"; Enelow York Life Ins. 379, 381-382 (1935). judgments, Peacock 516 -- (1996), award attorney's fees Alyeska Pipeline Service Wilderness Society, 421 240, 256 "E.g., Roadway Express, Piper, 447 752, 764-67 (1980) (assessing costs attorneys); Cooke 517, 534 (1925) (contempt power); Armstrong, 621 951, 954-55 (9th Cir. 1980) (allowing inspection property belonging parties); Franquez 604 1239 1979) (ordering contemplated statute); re Sealed Affidavit(s) Search Warrants (Agosto), 600 1256 (sealing papers court); Simmons, 536 827, 832-34 Cir.), 429 854 (1976) (dismissal prosecution); Malcolm, 475 1973) undergo psychiatric exam)." 765 1982). referred well-established oft-repeated substantial exclude hypothesis guilt, instruct accused F., 830 added). 1878), 1877), Hayden went describe settled time: "I where, guilty, or, found, class, guilty." 238. Out deference King, England. J. Stephen, History England 312-313 (1883); W. Blackstone, Commentaries *389-390. Even still, English evaded declining requesting Crown pardon convicted defendants. 875, (CA 1939). Kane remember instance recommendation disregarded ministers crown, suppose breach constitution realm." 137 1846). England, revisory apparent, real. judge, dissatisfied merits, respites reprieves prisoner, king's prerogative interposes thing course." wrong contend "farce" construe regulations entertain possesses prosecution's case-in-chief, disposing protects rebuttal risking emerge. protection favor. need" "even own." follows: one. Contrary language, old construction, "conve[y] idea," wishes whenever drafters convey potentially unconstitutional idea. drafters' "interpretation wish one," led references hint Notes, drafting simultaneously link dismisses taken, "timing". 15. truth, fundamental. entered, divides dismissing prosecution. "clarity text," renders logic inapplicable. fairly suggest origin easily withdrawn older vintage. convictions accepted. unpersuasive Link. say powers. reason, recitation analogous beside point. 15-16. problematic serious concerns. misplaced. neglect caused filing, extending "tak[ing] action" govern speaks convict imaginative choose

Category: 0