US · guidance
Justice Manual § 9-27.500
Offers to Plead Nolo Contendere—Opposition Except in Unusual Circumstances
The attorney for the government should oppose the acceptance of a plea of nolo contendere unless the United States Attorney and the appropriate Assistant Attorney General conclude that the circumstances of the case are so unusual that acceptance of such a plea would be in the public interest. See JM 9-16.010 (discussing the approval requirement).
Comment. Rule 11(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, requires the court to consider "the parties' views and the public interest in the effective administration of justice" before it accepts a plea of nolo contendere. Thus, it is clear that a criminal defendant has no absolute right to enter a nolo contendere ("nolo") plea. The Department has long attempted to discourage the disposition of criminal cases by means of nolo pleas.
Government attorneys have been instructed for many years not to consent to nolo pleas except in the most unusual circumstances, and to do so then only with Departmental approval. Federal prosecutors should oppose the acceptance of a nolo plea, unless the United States Attorney and the appropriate Assistant Attorney General concludes that the circumstances are so unusual that acceptance of the plea would be in the public interest.
History
[updated February 2018] [cited in JM 6-2.000; JM 6-4.320; JM 9-28.1300]
Provenance
- Source
- justice.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-20
- Edition
- jm-2026-09-20
- Content hash
cf31791cc6c10b7c342c71e3e6d46a3e9cfcae1cdc1460721a028bfb8708b5cd
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.