<P> When an officer of the court is found to have fraudulently presented facts to impair the court's impartial performance of its legal task, the act (known as fraud upon the court) is not subject to a statute of limitation . Officers of the court include lawyers, judges, referees, legal guardians, parenting - time expeditors, mediators, evaluators, administrators, special appointees and any others whose influence is part of the judicial mechanism . Fraud upon the court has been defined by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals to "embrace that species of fraud which does, or attempts to, defile the court itself, or is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court so that the judicial machinery cannot perform in the usual manner its impartial task of adjudging cases that are presented for adjudication". In Bulloch v. United States, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled: "Fraud upon the court is fraud which is directed to the judicial machinery itself and is not fraud between the parties or fraudulent documents, false statements or perjury...It is where the court or a member is corrupted or function--thus where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted ." </P> <P> Crimes considered heinous by society have no statute of limitations . Although there is usually no statute of limitations for murder (particularly first - degree murder), judges have been known to dismiss murder charges in cold cases if they feel the delay violates the defendant's right to a speedy trial . For example, waiting many years for an alibi witness to die before commencing a murder trial would be unconstitutional . In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court in Stogner v. California ruled that the retroactive extension of the statute of limitations for sexual offenses committed against minors was an unconstitutional ex post facto law . </P> <P> In tort law, if a defendant commits a series of illegal acts against another person (or in criminal law if someone commits a continuing crime) the limitation period may begin to run from the last act in the series . In the 8th Circuit case of Treanor v. MCI Telecommunications, Inc., the court explained that the continuing - violations doctrine "tolls (freezes) the statute of limitations in situations where a continuing pattern forms due to (illegal) acts occurring over a period of time, as long as at least one incident...occurred within the limitations period ." Whether the continuing - violations doctrine applies to a particular violation is subject to judicial discretion; it was ruled to apply to copyright infringement in Taylor v. Meirick (712 F. 2d 1112, 1119; 7th Cir. 1983) but not in Stone v. Williams (970 F. 2d 1043, 1049--50; 2d Cir. 1992). </P> <P> The statute of limitations in a criminal case only runs until a criminal charge is filed and a warrant is issued, even if the defendant is a fugitive . </P>

All of the following crimes have no statute of limitations except