Also known as: vitia clerici · clerical error · clerical mistake
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An error resulting from a minor mistake or inadvertence in writing or copying a judgment, order, or record, rather than from judicial reasoning or determination. Courts may correct such an error at any time on motion or sua sponte, subject to limits once an appeal is docketed.
After a bench trial, the court announced a five million dollar award to Violet Vang against Vanguard Bank. The clerk entered judgment for fifty million dollars due to a misplaced decimal. Vang moves under Rule 60(a) to correct the amount while an appeal is pending.
Detective Lopez submitted an affidavit correctly describing ByteBox but the judge signed a form listing TrendWear's address. Lopez notified the judge, who confirmed the mismatch was a clerical error and authorized the search of ByteBox. Officers executed the warrant at the intended location.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A Dixon County clerk cleared Luis Ortiz's warrant but neglected to update the shared database. Deputies relied on the outdated entry, arrested Ortiz, and searched his bunkhouse. The isolated database error had no pattern of recurrence.
A juror disclosed racial bias during deliberations but the court reporter transcribed the statement with an omitted phrase. The defense later sought to impeach the verdict using the corrected note. The transcription error was purely clerical.
Indiana's voter identification statute required the name on the ID to match the registration record exactly. A county clerk entered a minor spelling variation when processing Vivian Vaughn's registration. Election officials treated the discrepancy as a clerical error and allowed the ballot.
A court may correct a clerical mistake or oversight in a judgment or record at any time on motion or sua sponte. Once an appeal is docketed, leave from the appellate court is required. The correction restores the record to reflect the court's actual intention without altering substantive rulings.
No. Officers may reasonably rely in good faith on a warrant containing a judge's clerical error when the affidavit correctly identifies the target and officers search only the intended premises. Suppression is not required because the error is judicial rather than police misconduct.
An isolated clerical error by court staff that leaves an invalid warrant in a database does not trigger suppression when officers act in objective good faith. Courts weigh the minimal deterrent value against the social cost of excluding reliable evidence.
Yes. When a judge orally corrects a room number or similar detail on a preprinted form before execution, officers who rely on the affidavit and the correction act reasonably. The good faith exception applies because the defect is clerical and promptly addressed by the issuing judge.
…proposed rule. The substance of the Rule has not changed since 1975, except for a 2006 modification permitting evidence of a clerical mistake on the verdict form. See 574 U. S., at . The current version of Rule 606(b) states as follows: “(1) Prohibited Testimony or Other Evidence. During an inquiry into the validity of a…