U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART II— CRIMINAL PROCEDURE › Chapter CHAPTER 213— LIMITATIONS

18 U.S.C. § 3282

Offenses not capital

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have been committed.(b) DNA Profile Indictment.—(1)In general.—In any indictment for an offense under chapter 109A for which the identity of the accused is unknown, it shall be sufficient to describe the accused as an individual whose name is unknown, but who has a particular DNA profile.(2)Exception.—Any indictment described under paragraph (1), which is found not later than 5 years after the offense under chapter 109A is committed, shall not be subject to—(A) the limitations period described under subsection (a); and(B) the provisions of chapter 208 until the individual is arrested or served with a summons in connection with the charges contained in the indictment.(3)Defined term.—For purposes of this subsection, the term “DNA profile” means a set of DNA identification characteristics.(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 828; Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1214, § 12(a), formerly § 10(a), 68 Stat. 1145; renumbered Pub. L. 87–299, § 1, Sept. 26, 1961, 75 Stat. 648; Pub. L. 108–21, title VI, § 610(a), Apr. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 692.)Historical and Revision Notes

Based on section 746(g) of title 8, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Aliens and Nationality, and on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 582 (R.S. § 1044; Apr. 13, 1876, ch. 56, 19 Stat. 32; Nov. 17, 1921, ch. 124, § 1, 42 Stat. 220; Dec. 27, 1927, ch. 6, 45 Stat. 51; Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 876, title I, subchap. III, § 346(g), 54 Stat. 1167).

Section 582 of title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., and section 746(g) of title 8, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Aliens and Nationality, were consolidated. “Except as otherwise expressly provided by law” was inserted to avoid enumeration of exceptive provisions.

The proviso contained in the act of 1927 “That nothing herein contained shall apply to any offense for which an indictment has been heretofore found or an information instituted, or to any proceedings under any such indictment or information,” was omitted as no longer necessary.

In the consolidation of these sections the 5-year period of limitation for violations of the Nationality Code, provided for in said section 746(g) of title 8, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Aliens and Nationality, is reduced to 3 years. There seemed no sound basis for considering 3 years adequate in the case of heinous felonies and gross frauds against the United States but inadequate for misuse of a passport or false statement to a naturalization examiner.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2003—Pub. L. 108–21 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).

1954—Act Sept. 1, 1954, changed the limitation period from three years to five years.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1954 Amendment

Act Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1214, § 12(b), formerly section 10(b), 68 Stat. 1145, as renumbered by Pub. L. 87–299, § 1, Sept. 26, 1961, 75 Stat. 648, provided that: “The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall be effective with respect to offenses (1) committed on or after September 1, 1954, or (2) committed prior to such date, if on such date prosecution therefor is not barred by provisions of law in effect prior to such date.”

Fugitives From Justice

Statutes of limitations as not extending to persons fleeing from justice, see section 3290 of this title.

Offenses Against Internal Security

Limitation period in connection with offenses against internal security, see section 783 of Title 50, War and National Defense.

Sections 792, 793, and 794 of This Title; Limitation Period

Limitation period in connection with sections 792, 793, and 794 of this title, see note set out under section 792.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,370 cases (79 in the last 5 years), 1949–2026 · leading case: Musacchio v. United States
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Musacchio v. United States (2016) scotus · cites it 3× “We next consider whether the statute-of-limitations defense contained in 18 U.S.C. § 3282 (a) (the general federal criminal statute of limitations) may be successfully raised for the first time on appeal.”
United States v. Douglas G. Thompson Roger D. Thompson (2002) ca10 · cites it 11× “Because this court concludes that an indictment is “found” under 18 U.S.C. § 3282 when the grand jury votes to indict and the foreperson subscribes it as a true bill, the statute of limitations was satisfied.”
People v. Thoro Products Co., Inc. (2003) colo · cites it 4× “See 18 U.S.C. § 3282 (federal criminal offenses); 28 U.”
United States v. Delfino De Leon-Ramirez (2019) ca4 · cites it 2× “The sole merits issue is whether the district court should have dismissed De Leon-Ramirez's indictment as untimely. Because the illegal reentry statute provides no statute of limitations, prosecutions are subject to the general five-year limitations period for non-capital crimes.”
Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc. (1987) scotus · cites it 4× “See 18 U. S. C. § 3282 . This statute of limitations, however, is the general "catchall" federal criminal statute of limitations.”
Dorian Ragland v. United States (2014) ca8 · cites it 9× “§ 2255 , asserting his trial counsel “provided ineffective assistance by failing to challenge the timeliness of his indictment pursuant to the limitations imposed by 18 U.S.C. § 3282 .” Ragland also requests we expand the certificate of appealability and remand for further…”
United States v. Green (2010) ca4 · cites it 4× “Furthermore, in arguments that we regard as simply two ways of saying the same thing, he contends (1) that the Government failed to prove that he committed an overt act in furtherance of the drug conspiracy within the applicable five year period of limitations, see 18 U.S.C. §…”
United States v. Payne (2010) ca2 · cites it 4× “, more than five years before the March 7, 2005 filing of the original indictment, see 18 U.S.C. § 3282 (a), or for insufficiency of the evidence.”
People v. Robinson (2010) cal · cites it 4× “) The court's review of the status of DNA indictments throughout the country is thorough, and we incorporate it here as part of our analysis: "Some states have employed non-statutory DNA indictments, but in addition to the federal legislation ( 18 USC § 3282 ) there are four…”
Dorsey v. United States (2012) scotus · cites it 2× “See 18 U. S. C. §3282 (a); Administrative Office of United States Courts, Judicial Business of the United States Courts, p.”
Weingarten v. United States (2017) ca2 · cites it 3× “Weingar-ten contends his counsel should have argued that (1) the 2003 version of § 3283 does not apply retroactively to his 1997 offense conduct and, alternatively, (2) under the categorical approach, § 2423 charges are subject to the default five-year federal criminal…”
United States v. Franco-Santiago (2012) ca1 · cites it 5× “See 18 U.S.C. § 3282 (a). In short, the government was two weeks too late in indicting him on August 22, 2007, for an August 7, 2002, robbery.”
Show all 1,370 citing cases →
— 18 U.S.C. § 3282(a) — 5 cases
United States v. Krstic (2009) ca9
United States v. Brunell (2018) dcd
United States v. Wilkins (2022) dcd
United States v. Biaou (2026) dcd
United States v. Krstic (2009) ca9
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.