Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Note, When a Company Confesses

28 Pages Posted: 29 Mar 2011  

Christopher Jackson

Law Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals; University of Michigan Law School

Date Written: December 1, 2010


Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a defendant is normally obligated to attend all of the proceedings against her. However, Rule 43(b)(2) carves out an exception for organizational defendants, stating that they “need not be present” if represented by an attorney. But on its face, the language of 43(b)(2) is ambiguous: is it the defendant or the judge who has the discretion to decide whether the defendant appears? That is, may a judge compel the presence of an organizational defendant? This Note addresses the ambiguity in the context of the plea colloquy, considering the text of several of the Rules, the purposes behind the plea colloquy proceeding, and the inherent powers doctrine. It argues that district court judges do in fact have the authority to compel an organizational defendant’s presence at a plea colloquy.

Keywords: Criminal procedure, corporate, criminal law, federal rules of criminal procedure, statutory interpretation, inherent powers, guilty plea, plea colloquy

Suggested Citation

Jackson, Christopher, Note, When a Company Confesses (December 1, 2010). Michigan Law Review, Vol. 109, No. 3, 2010. Available at SSRN:

Christopher M. Jackson (Contact Author)

University of Michigan Law School ( email )

Ann Arbor, MI
United States

Law Clerk, U.S. Court of Appeals ( email )

United States
775-233-0499 (Phone)

Paper statistics

Abstract Views