JUSTICE SUTHERLAND delivered the opinion of the Court. 707, to review a judgment of the circuit court of appeals which reversed a judgment of the district court, 29 F.2d 744, sentencing the respondent after a plea of nolo contendere to an indictment charging conspiracy to transport intoxicating liquors in violation of the National Prohibition Act.ĬERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS After a plea of nolo contendere, nothing remains for the court but to render judgment, as no issue of fact exists and none can be made while the plea remains of record. Regarded as evidence upon the question of guilt or innocence, the stipulation came too late, for the plea of nolo contendere, upon that question and for that case, was as conclusive as a plea of guilty would have been. If the stipulation be regarded as adding particulars to the indictment, it is void under the rule that nothing can be added to an indictment without the concurrence of the grand jury by which the bill was found.
After entry of a plea of nolo contendere to an indictment charging conspiracy unlawfully to transport intoxicating liquors in violation of the National Prohibition Act, a stipulation of facts filed by aĭefendant and received by the trial court merely as evidence for its information in determining what sentence should be imposed is ineffective to import an issue as to the sufficiency of the indictment, or an issue of fact upon the question of guilt or innocence.
0 kommentar(er)
