Blog
Federal Mail Fraud Explained: Elements and Defenses
The Statute and Its Reach Section 1341 was written in 1872, amended without meaningful revision for over a century, and remains the statute federal prosecutors reach for first when the underlying conduct could be called almost anything. The statute concerns fraud. The mail is merely the jurisdictional mechanism, the thread that pulls what would otherwise […]
read moreFederal Wire Fraud Charges (18 U.S.C. § 1343): Defense Strategies
The statute that governs federal wire fraud is not a scalpel. It is a net, and for the better part of three decades, federal prosecutors have cast it as one. Section 1343 of Title 18 criminalizes the use of interstate electronic communications in furtherance of a scheme to defraud, and its reach extends to virtually […]
read moreFederal Money Laundering Charges and Defenses
The charge that transforms every other count on a federal indictment is money laundering. A wire fraud case carrying a sentencing range of twelve to eighteen months becomes, with the addition of a Section 1956 count, a case in which the court is contemplating a decade or more. Federal prosecutors understand this arithmetic, and they […]
read moreWhat Is Considered a White Collar Crime?
White collar crime is not a charge. It is a classification applied after the fact to conduct that federal and state statutes describe in far more precise terms. No defendant is indicted for “white collar crime.” The indictment names wire fraud, or securities fraud, or conspiracy to commit money laundering, and the label “white collar” […]
read moreWhite Collar Crimes
The Comfort of Declining Numbers Federal white collar prosecutions are declining, and the decline is accelerating. In the first half of fiscal year 2025, new cases fell more than ten percent from the prior year. FBI field offices have redirected agents toward immigration enforcement. The numbers, taken alone, suggest a federal government retreating from financial […]
read moreCan I Get Probation Instead of Prison for a Federal Crime?
Probation is available in federal court. The conditions under which a judge may impose it are considerably narrower than most defendants comprehend when they first receive an indictment. The Statutory Exclusions Under 18 U.S.C. § 3561, a defendant found guilty of a federal offense may be sentenced to probation unless the conviction falls within one […]
read moreFirst-Time Offender in Federal Court: What to Expect
First-Time Offender in Federal Court: What to Expect The phrase “first-time offender” does more work in federal court than it has any right to. Clients arrive with the assumption that the absence of a criminal record functions as a defense, or at minimum a guarantee of leniency. It is neither. What a clean record provides […]
read moreHow to Prepare for Federal Sentencing
The sentence is not decided at the hearing. It is decided in the months before it, through documents the judge reads in chambers, without the benefit of oral advocacy or the defendant’s presence. The hearing itself, in most federal courtrooms, consumes less than an hour. In some, less than thirty minutes. The preparation for that […]
read moreFederal Sentencing Departures and Variances Explained
The sentence is not decided at the hearing. It is decided in the months before it, through documents the judge reads in chambers, without the benefit of oral advocacy or the defendant’s presence. The hearing itself, in most federal courtrooms, consumes less than an hour. In some, less than thirty minutes. The preparation for that […]
read moreWhat Is a Presentence Report (PSR) and Why Does It Matter?
The Document That Sentences You Twice The presentence report determines more than the length of a federal sentence. It determines where that sentence is served, under what conditions, and with what access to programming that can reduce it. Most defendants learn this too late. The report, compiled by a United States Probation Officer in the […]
read moreHow Mandatory Minimum Sentences Work in Federal Court
The Sentence Before the Sentence The mandatory minimum is not the punishment. It is the architecture of a negotiation that begins the moment the indictment is returned, and in most federal cases, the negotiation is the sentence. The statute prescribes a floor. The prosecutor controls access to every door beneath it. Federal mandatory minimum sentencing […]
read moreUnderstanding the Federal Sentencing Guidelines
The federal sentencing guidelines do not sentence anyone. A judge does, in a courtroom, after considering a set of calculations that most defendants encounter for the first time in the weeks following indictment. Most people who search for information about sentencing guidelines are not engaged in academic research. They are reading because a number has […]
read moreFederal Sentencing
The guidelines do not sentence anyone. A judge does, in a courtroom where the arithmetic of offense levels and criminal history categories has already been performed by a probation officer the defendant did not choose and may never see again. The question is what the judge decides to do with that recommendation, and how prepared […]
read moreRule 35 Motions: Reducing Your Sentence After Cooperation
The sentence has already been imposed, the courtroom has already emptied, and the only mechanism for revisiting the number requires someone other than the defendant to act. Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure permits a federal court to reduce a sentence when a defendant provides substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution […]
read moreWhat Is Substantial Assistance in Federal Cases?
The Quiet Mechanics of Cooperation Substantial assistance is the federal system’s most consequential bargain, and most defendants misunderstand its terms before they have finished signing the cooperation agreement. The phrase appears in §5K1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines and in 18 U.S.C. §3553(e), and what it describes is not a reward for compliance. It […]
read moreProffer vs. Plea Agreement: What's the Difference?
The proffer is the most dangerous meeting in federal criminal practice, and most defendants walk into the room believing it protects them. The nickname does not help. “Queen for a Day” suggests generosity, a temporary courtesy extended by the prosecution to someone under investigation. The courtesy, if one can call it that, is conditional, revocable, […]
read moreCan a Proffer Agreement Be Used Against Me?
A proffer agreement protects almost nothing. The document itself, two or three pages of boilerplate that federal prosecutors present as a formality before the session begins, contains language that preserves more of the government’s options than it surrenders. Most clients who sign one believe they are receiving immunity. What they are receiving is a narrow […]
read moreHow a Proffer Session Works in Federal Criminal Cases
The Letter Before the Conversation The proffer agreement is the most consequential document in a federal criminal case that no jury will ever read. Before the defendant speaks a single word in the conference room at the United States Attorney’s Office, before the investigating agents have arranged their files across the table, the letter has […]
read moreShould I Cooperate With Federal Prosecutors? Risks and Rewards
Cooperation with federal prosecutors is the single most consequential decision a defendant will make, and it is almost always made too early. Before the weight of the choice is understood, before counsel has examined the government’s evidence, before anyone has considered what the proffer room will demand, the question is already on the table. The […]
read moreWhat Is a Federal Proffer Agreement ("Queen for a Day")?
The proffer agreement is the most misunderstood document in federal criminal practice. Defendants sign it believing their words cannot follow them into a courtroom. Prosecutors draft it knowing how those words will travel. Between the text of the letter and the reality of what follows, the distance is considerable, and most of the danger lives […]
read moreProffer Agreements & Cooperation
The Document You Sign Before You Speak A proffer agreement is the most consequential document a federal defendant will sign before trial, and it is the least understood at the moment of signing. The agreement states that your words will not be used against you in a subsequent proceeding. That statement is not false. […]
read moreCan I Record My Interview With Federal Agents?
The Federal Baseline The right to record a federal agent exists, in most of the country, before the agent ever arrives at the door. Under 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d), federal wiretap law permits the recording of any conversation so long as one party to that conversation consents. If you are the one holding the phone, the […]
read moreNon-Custodial FBI Interviews: Do I Have Rights?
Non-Custodial FBI Interviews: Do I Have Rights? The Gap Between Belief and Protection Your rights during a non-custodial FBI interview are fewer than you imagine, more consequential than you expect, and almost entirely contingent on whether you comprehend them before agents appear at your door. The word “non-custodial” performs a specific legal function here: it […]
read moreCan Federal Agents Lie During Interrogations?
Can Federal Agents Lie During Interrogations? Federal agents are permitted to lie to you during an interrogation, and the legal authority for that permission is older than most of the agents who exercise it. The answer to the question in the title is not complicated. The consequences of that answer are. The Legal Foundation In […]
read moreWhat Happens If I Talk to Federal Agents Without a Lawyer?
What Happens If I Talk to Federal Agents Without a Lawyer? The conversation you had with the federal agents is now the government’s evidence. Not the documents they inquired about, not the financial records they referenced, but the conversation itself, reduced to a few paragraphs on a government form you will never sign, composed from […]
read moreWhen Does Miranda Apply in Federal Criminal Cases?
When Does Miranda Apply in Federal Criminal Cases? Miranda does not protect most people who need it in federal criminal cases, because it does not apply at the moment they assume it does. The protection attaches only when two conditions converge: custody and interrogation. Federal agents understand this convergence better than the people they question. […]
read moreMiranda Rights & Federal Interviews
The Silence That Costs Nothing Miranda v. Arizona protects less than most people believe, and it protects it later than they expect. The warning itself, familiar from courtroom dramas and from the particular anxiety of a first encounter with law enforcement, applies only where two conditions converge: custody and interrogation. In the federal context, those […]
read moreShould I Cooperate With an FBI Investigation?
Should I Cooperate With an FBI Investigation? Cooperation is not a binary. It is a sequence of smaller decisions, each carrying its own risk, and the first one is almost always made before the person understands what cooperation will cost. The instinct to cooperate with the FBI is a reasonable one. It is also, in […]
read moreDo FBI Agents Have to Read Me My Miranda Rights?
Do FBI Agents Have to Read Me My Miranda Rights? The answer is no, not always, and the circumstances under which the obligation does not apply are far more common than most people recognize. Miranda warnings attach to a specific legal event: custodial interrogation. They do not attach to the arrest itself. They do not […]
read moreMiranda Rights & Federal Interview
The Interview That Is Not an Interrogation Federal agents do not read Miranda warnings during most of the interviews that produce criminal convictions. The warning itself, perhaps the most recognized sentence in American criminal procedure, applies to a circumstance most people will never encounter in the way they imagine: the custodial interrogation, conducted in a […]
read more