The statute of limitations (SOL) in federal criminal cases is not just a procedural formality, but a crucial aspect that often involves complex procedures aimed at gathering sufficient evidence to support prosecution. This can sometimes conflict with the statute of limitations deadline for one or more offenses, underscoring the gravity of the situation.
For this reason, the 18 U.S. Code § 3292 plays a crucial role in granting prosecutors the vital authority to suspend the statute of limitations (SOL) in federal cases under specific circumstances when evidence is located in foreign jurisdictions. This is a vital tool that enables the collection of additional evidence internationally, ensuring a thorough and fair legal process.
While the courts may deem the suspension of the statute of limitations to be a necessary delay, it's important to note that misuse of this provision can potentially infringe on your ability to get a fair and speedy trial. The court's role in this process is crucial, ensuring that the suspension is not abused and the legal process remains fair and transparent.
Simply put, when the US Government pursues a criminal investigation involving foreign countries, it can take significantly more time and resources to obtain the necessary information.
In these circumstances, the Government can move to suspend or toll the statute of limitations for a specified period while it pursues the evidence. It's important to note that this suspension is not indefinite, and the SOL will resume once the necessary evidence is obtained.
Recently, a tax attorney in Texas was convicted in an offshore tax evasion scheme involving income that was routed through various foreign countries. The US government aggressively pursued the attorney, which led to a jury convicting him of tax evasion, and he was sentenced to 24 months in prison.
During the trial, the defendant presented arguments regarding why the statute of limitations had expired, in addition to his claim that the jury instructions were inaccurate. The government contended that, under 18 USC section 3292, the SOL should have been tolled, and thus it had not expired. The trial court agreed, but the Court of Appeals in the Fifth Circuit did not, and vacated the ruling.
What Does Federal Law Say?
18 U.S. Code § 3292 - Suspension of limitations to permit the United States to obtain foreign evidence says -
"(a)(1) Upon application of the United States, filed before return of an indictment, indicating that evidence of an offense is in a foreign country, the district court before which a grand jury is impaneled to investigate the offense shall suspend the running of the statute of limitations for the offense.
This is contingent on the court finding by a preponderance of the evidence that an official request has been made for such evidence and that it reasonably appears, or reasonably appeared at the time the request was made, that such evidence is, or was, in such foreign country.
(2) The court shall rule upon such application not later than thirty days after the filing of the application.
(b) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, a period of suspension under this section shall begin on the date on which the official request is made and end on the date on which the foreign court or authority takes final action on the request.
(c) The total of all periods of suspension under this section with respect to an offense-
(1) shall not exceed three years; and
(2) shall not extend a period within which a criminal case must be initiated for more than six months if all foreign authorities take final action before such period would expire without regard to this section.
(d) As used in this section, the term "official request" means a letter rogatory, a request under a treaty or convention, or any other request for evidence made by a court of the United States or an authority of the United States having criminal law enforcement responsibility, to a court or other authority of a foreign country."
Suspension of SOL Explained
The statute of limitations is a legal deadline by which prosecutors must file criminal charges. Once this period expires, the government can no longer pursue prosecution against you.
As noted above, under U.S.C. § 3292, prosecutors may request a pause or "suspension" of the statute of limitations (SOL) when awaiting evidence from a foreign country. This suspension, which can be granted under specific conditions, effectively extends the timeframe for bringing charges, ensuring you are informed and prepared for the legal proceedings.
For the law to apply, federal prosecutors must confirm that the evidence they seek is located in another country and that an official request for it has been made or is about to be made through the proper international agreements.
A federal judge must verify whether the request is legitimate and necessary for the case, having 30 days to either approve or deny it. Key stipulations include the following:
- The request is subject to rigorous judicial oversight. A prosecutor's request to suspend the statute of limitations is not automatically granted. A federal district court judge must meticulously review the request and ensure that the statutory conditions have been met. This crucial layer of oversight guarantees the fairness of the process and prevents arbitrary or undue delays, providing reassurance to all parties involved.
- Prosecutors must seek evidence through official channels, such as Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs). These treaties facilitate cooperation between countries and establish a legal route for obtaining foreign evidence.
- SOL suspension is capped at three years. Once the suspension ends, unless charges are filed, the statute of limitations resumes, barring future prosecutions for the offense once it expires. Additionally, if foreign authorities respond in a timely manner, the deadline for initiating the case is capped at six months after the previous deadline.
Implications for Defendants
For defendants, 18 U.S.C. 3292 creates challenges by extending the timeline during which they could face prosecution. Delays attributable to the collection of foreign evidence can disrupt lives and prolong legal uncertainty. Additionally, any unnecessary delays could potentially corrupt existing evidence that might exonerate you. While designed to support legitimate investigations, the statute may be susceptible to misuse. For example:
- Prosecutors might improperly seek suspension where no genuine effort is made to pursue foreign evidence, or
- They may allow the suspension period to lapse without providing substantive updates about the status of the request.
These actions could unfairly hinder a defendant's ability to resolve pending charges, underscoring the need for caution in their application and the importance of vigilance in the legal process.
Furthermore, addressing international evidence requests involves geopolitical challenges, including language barriers and jurisdiction disputes. These complexities can leave defendants in a protracted state of uncertainty, causing unnecessary stress and financial strain, and highlighting the broader implications of the statute.
What are Related Federal Laws?
In addition to 18 U.S. Code 3292, several other federal laws govern the collection and use of evidence in criminal cases. Understanding these laws can provide a more comprehensive view of the legal landscape and potential implications for your case.
18 U.S. Code Chapter 213 Part II, Limitations, has numerous related federal statutes, including the following:
- 18 U.S.C. 3281 - Capital offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3282 - Offenses not capital.
- 18 U.S.C. 3283 - Offenses against children.
- 18 U.S.C. 3284 - Concealment of a bankrupt's assets.
- 18 U.S.C. 3285 - Criminal contempt.
- 18 U.S.C. 3286 - Extension of the statute of limitations for certain terrorism offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3287 - Wartime suspension of limitations.
- 18 U.S.C. 3288 - Indictments and information dismissed after the period of limitations.
- 18 U.S.C. 3289 - Indictments and information dismissed before the period of limitations.
- 18 U.S.C. 3290 - Fugitives from justice.
- 18 U.S.C. 3291 - Nationality, citizenship, and passports.
- 18 U.S.C. 3293 - Financial institution offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3294 - Theft of a major artwork.
- 18 U.S.C. 3295 - Arson offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3296 - Counts dismissed pursuant to a plea agreement.
- 18 U.S.C. 3297 - Cases involving DNA evidence.
- 18 U.S.C. 3298 - Trafficking-related offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3299 - Child abduction and sex offenses.
- 18 U.S.C. 3300 - Recruitment or use of child soldiers.
- 18 U.S.C. 3301 - Securities fraud offenses.
What are the Legal Challenges?
Defendants have a variety of defenses available to them when responding to tolling applications under section 3292, including challenges to the initial application, the final action by the foreign government, and due process considerations.
The government's initial ex parte application offers the first avenue of defense. The due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibits the deprivation of "life, liberty, or property, without the due process of law." Where the government's tolling request was submitted to the court ex parte, defendants may argue that the application violates due process.
If you discover that you are under investigation for possible federal criminal charges, the statute of limitations serves as a constitutional safeguard that may also need to be defended. When a petition is granted to suspend the statute of limitations under 18 U.S.C. 3292, a skilled federal criminal defense attorney can protect your rights by monitoring evidence timelines and identifying procedural violations. For example:
- If prosecutors fail to adhere to the statute's requirements for judicial oversight, an attorney may challenge the validity of the SOL suspension.
- Similarly, an attorney can file motions to dismiss charges if the government exceeds the allowable timeframe for prosecution despite the suspension.
Effective representation may also involve questioning the legitimacy of the foreign evidence request itself. If the evidence sought is irrelevant to the charges or the request was improperly served, your attorney could argue for dismissal on procedural grounds. By holding federal authorities accountable for meeting statutory and judicial obligations, attorneys help ensure that the law is not misused or misinterpreted.
Protecting Your Rights
Delays in bringing charges may not only impact your legal defense strategy but also pose risks to your personal and professional life, not to mention violating your constitutional right to a speedy trial. An experienced federal defense attorney can evaluate whether procedural errors occurred and fight for dismissal if it's determined that federal prosecutors have overstepped their legal limits.
For additional information, contact our federal criminal defense law firm, Eisner Gorin LLP, located in Los Angeles, California.
Related Content:
