Criminal Defense Lawyers

Dallas, TX Federal Criminal Defense Lawyers

Dallas, TX Federal Criminal Defense Lawyers

Welcome to Spodek Law Group. Our goal is to give you the information you need to understand what you’re actually facing if federal agents have contacted you in Dallas. Not the version that makes you feel better. The version that might save your career.

Here’s what nobody tells you about federal criminal defense in Dallas: the city sells itself as business-friendly Texas, but the Northern District federal court operates as one of the nation’s most aggressive corporate fraud prosecution machines. The $7 billion Stanford Financial collapse taught federal prosecutors here that respectable professionals with downtown offices commit sophisticated frauds, and now every healthcare provider, financial advisor, and corporate executive is suspect. The same business infrastructure that attracts Fortune 500 companies creates opportunities for wire fraud, securities violations, and healthcare schemes – and Northern District prosecutors have made careers destroying professionals who thought Dallas’s reputation would protect them.

The federal conviction rate in Dallas mirrors the national average: approximately 99% when you count plea deals. If your case goes to trial, the acquittal rate sits around 0.4%. That’s not a scare tactic. That’s the statistical reality your facing. Federal prosecutors in the Northern District of Texas don’t bring charges unless there confident they’ll win, and the Stanford case proved they have the resources and institutional memory to take down anyone – regardless of how respectable you seem.

The $7 Billion Legacy That Changed Everything

In 2012, Allen Stanford recieved a 110-year sentence for running a $7 billion Ponzi scheme. He wasnt some street criminal. He was a billionaire financier with political connections who operated openly in Houston and managed the scheme through offshore banks marketed to wealthy investors. Stanford Financial Group had offices, advisors, regulatory filings – all the trappings of legitimacy.

The case was prosecuted in the Northern District of Texas. And it changed everything about how federal prosecutors here view white-collar defendants.

Before Stanford, there might of been an assumption that respectable professionals with established businesses deserved some benefit of the doubt. That legitimate-looking operations were probably legitimate. That people with political connections and country club memberships were different than “real criminals.” Stanford destroyed every one of those assumptions. He proved that Dallas-area professionals can run billion-dollar frauds while maintaining respectible appearances for years.

Here’s what that means for you if your under investigation now. Federal prosecutors in the Northern District have institutional memory of taking down one of the largest financial frauds in American history. They know that sophisticated criminals dont look like criminals. They know that downtown offices and professional credentials can hide massive schemes. They know that “I didnt realize it was illegal” or “everyone in the industry does this” means nothing when the evidence shows intent.

The Stanford prosecution created a template. Complex financial crimes? The Northern District has done it. Defendants with resources who can afford the best legal teams? They’ve beaten them. Cases that take years to investigate and prosecute? They have the patience and the budget. If your a financial advisor, investment professional, or anyone handling other people’s money in the Dallas area, your being compared to Stanford – whether you know it or not.

Prosecutors dont view Dallas professionals as less likely to commit fraud becuase of the business-friendly reputation. They view them as MORE sophisticated criminals requiring MORE resources to prosecute. That’s the Stanford legacy.

And the sentencing? 110 years. At age 62. Effectively a life sentence for financial crimes. The judge rejected every argument about Stanford’s age, his health, his claimed charitable work. The sentence was designed to send a message: respectability is not a shield. If anything, betraying the trust that comes with professional credentials makes the crime worse, not better.

100 Counties, Multiple Divisions, One Trap

Heres something most federal defense content completly ignores about the Northern District of Texas. The district covers 100 counties. Thats not a typo. One hundred counties across north and central Texas, divided into multiple divisions: Dallas, Fort Worth, Abilene, Amarillo, Lubbock, San Angelo, and Wichita Falls.

Why does this matter? Becuase federal venue rules allow prosecutors to bring charges in any district were part of the crime occured. If you sent an email from Dallas to Fort Worth? Multiple venues. If you made phone calls across the district? Multiple venues. If you submitted billing from one county but the healthcare provider was in another? Multiple venues.

The goverment gets to pick. And there going to pick the division with the judge pool that favors prosecution.

Practitioners know this as forum shopping, and its completly legal. The Northern District’s size creates massive opportunities for prosecutors to engineer favorable venues. They can file in Dallas where certain judges have reputations for harsh sentencing in white-collar cases. They can avoid divisions were defense attorneys have had more success. You dont get a say in this untill after your indicted, and by then your fighting uphill to transfer venue – a motion that rarely succeeds.

Defense attorneys call this the geography trap. Your business might be in Plano. But if any part of the alleged scheme touched Fort Worth or involved communications across district lines, prosecutors can file wherever they want within the Northern District. The 100-county jurisdiction that seems like just an administrative detail actually gives the goverment strategic advantages before trial even begins.

And heres the kicker. Once venue is set, your stuck with that division’s judges. Federal judges are randomly assigned within there division, but some divisions have smaller judge pools with known sentencing patterns. If you pull a judge whose built a reputation on harsh white-collar sentences, your plea negotiation position weakens immediatly. The prosecutor knows it. Your attorney knows it. And the guidelines might say one thing, but judicial discretion can add years.

This is why early intervention matters. Before charges are filed, theres sometimes room to negotiate which charges get brought and were. After indictment? The prosecutors already picked the battlefield.

Why Dallas Healthcare Providers Are Federal Targets

If your a doctor, nurse practitioner, clinic owner, or healthcare administrator in Dallas, listen carefully to this section. The Northern District of Texas has made healthcare fraud prosecutions a major priority, and the cases there bringing destroy medical careers regularly.

Medicare and Medicaid fraud investigations often start with data analytics. The goverment runs your billing patterns through statistical models comparing you to other providers in your specialty and geographic area. If your billing for certain procedures at rates significantly higher then your peers, that triggers scrutiny. If your patient visit numbers seem unusually high, that triggers scrutiny. If your prescribing controlled substances at higher rates then comparable providers, that triggers scrutiny.

Here’s were Dallas healthcare providers get this wrong. They think becuase there documentation looks complete, there protected. They think becuase the billing software generated the codes automaticaly, they didnt do anything wrong. They think becuase other doctors in there network bill the same way, its normal practice.

None of that matters if federal investigators decide your billing patterns dont match what they consider medicaly necessary. There going to bring in expert reviewers who will testify that the procedures werent indicated, the visits werent justified, the diagnoses were exaggerated to support higher-level billing codes. There going to interview your patients. There going to review medical records looking for discrepancies between documentation and billed services.

The healthcare fraud statute dosent require proof that you personally intended to defraud Medicare. It requires proof that you knowingly submitted false claims. And “knowing” can include deliberate ignorance – if you had reason to suspect the billing was improper but didnt investigate, that can satisfy the knowledge requirement.

In fiscal year 2023, the Department of Justice recovered over $2.68 billion in healthcare fraud settlements and judgements. Dallas healthcare providers accounted for multiple cases in that total. Were talking about physicians who thought “upcoding” was just maximizing reimbursement. Clinic owners who thought there billing company was handling compliance. Medical directors who signed off on claims without reviewing them becuase they trusted there staff.

The penalties? Healthcare fraud under 18 USC 1347 carries up to 10 years per count. If serious bodily injury resulted from the fraud, that increases to 20 years. If death resulted, its life in prison. And your not looking at one count – your looking at however many false claims the goverment can prove. Each seperete claim can be a seperate count.

If you recieve a target letter or get contacted by FBI or HHS-OIG investigators about your billing practices, do not talk to them without an attorney who understands federal healthcare fraud prosecutions. What you think is explaining your medical decision-making can become admissions of knowing misconduct.

The other trap for healthcare providers: civil settlements. Sometimes the goverment offers to resolve the investigation civilly through a settlement agreement and exclusion from Medicare. Losing your Medicare billing privilages destroys most medical practices. But signing the civil settlement dosent necessarily prevent criminal prosecution later if new evidence emerges. And the settlement agreement includes admissions that can be used against you.

Dallas has major medical centers and a large healthcare industry. That makes it a target-rich environment for federal healthcare fraud prosecution. Your in the wrong place with the wrong specialty at the wrong time if your billing practices have any vulnerabilities.

The Corporate Headquarters Paradox

Dallas’s business infrastructure is exactly what makes it attractive for corporate headquarters – and exactly what makes it dangerous for federal prosecution. The concentration of Fortune 500 companies creates the mechanisms that convert ordinary business activities into federal crimes.

Wire fraud is the perfect example. 18 USC 1343 criminalizes using wire communications in furtherance of a scheme to defraud. What are wire communications? Emails. Phone calls. Text messages. Electronic fund transfers. Basicly every communication tool that modern businesses use constantly.

Dallas is a telecommunications hub. AT&T is headquartered here. The infrastructure for electronic communications is dense and sophisticated. Which means every business email you send, every client call you make, every electronic payment you process creates potential wire fraud exposure if the goverment decides your business practices constitute a “scheme to defraud.”

Heres were this gets uncomfortable. You dont need to be running an obvious scam. Wire fraud prosecutions can target aggressive sales practices, misleading marketing, failure to disclose material information, anything were the goverment can argue you used deception to obtain money or property. The “scheme to defraud” element is interpreted broadly. And becuase Dallas businesses send thousands of emails and make thousands of calls, prosecutors can pile up wire fraud counts quickly.

Securities fraud works the same way. Dallas has a large financial services industry – investment advisors, broker-dealers, hedge funds, private equity. Securities fraud under 18 USC 1348 targets schemes to defraud investors or obtain money through false pretenses in connection with securities. What counts as securities? The definition is broad. Investment contracts, stock, bonds, notes, basically any investment of money in a common enterprise with expectation of profits from others efforts.

The Stanford case was securities fraud. Certificates of deposit marketed as safe, high-return investments were actually funding a Ponzi scheme. But securities fraud dosent require a Ponzi scheme. It can be misrepresenting a companys financial condition to investors. Failing to disclose conflicts of interest. Manipulating stock prices through false statements. Using insider information. The Dallas financial services industry creates constant opportunities for conduct that federal prosecutors can characterize as securities fraud.

And then theres tax fraud. Corporate headquarters means complex corporate structures, international operations, transfer pricing, R&D credits, every sophisticated tax strategy that large businesses use. The line between aggressive tax planning and tax fraud is something prosecutors get to define after the fact. If your company took deductions or credits that the IRS later disallows, that might just be a tax audit with penalties and interest. Or it might become criminal tax evasion if prosecutors decide the positions were so unreasonable that you must of known they were false.

The paradox: Dallas’s business-friendly infrastructure makes it easy to do business. And that same infrastructure makes it easy to commit federal crimes – often without realizing your doing anything different than your competitors. The telecommunications networks that enable efficient business operations create wire fraud evidence. The financial services industry that manages wealth creates securities fraud exposure. The sophisticated corporate structures that optimize operations create tax fraud vulnerability.

Prosecutors dont view this as a problem with the law being too broad. They view Dallas’s business concentration as a target-rich environment.

What “Aggressive Business Practices” Actually Mean in Federal Court

There’s a cultural gap between Dallas business norms and federal criminal law that destroys defendants constantly. What the business community calls “aggressive marketing” or “maximizing revenue” or “competitive advantage,” federal prosecutors call fraud.

Take sales practices. Dallas has a strong sales culture – tech companies, real estate, financial services, healthcare services all compete aggressively for customers. Sales teams are trained to emphasize benefits, minimize drawbacks, close deals. Nobody thinks there doing anything wrong when they describe there product in the best possible light and downplay limitations.

Federal prosecutors call that “material misrepresentation” or “fraud by omission.” If you emphasized the potential returns on an investment but didnt adequately disclose the risks? Fraud. If you marketed a medical device’s benefits but minimized known complications? Fraud. If you sold a product as compliant with regulations when you knew there were compliance questions? Fraud.

Or take the “everyone does it” defense. Dallas professionals charged with fraud constantly point to industry practices. “Every financial advisor in town structures fees this way.” “All the clinics in our network use this billing model.” “This is standard practice in our industry.”

Federal judges dont care. Widespread industry practice dosent make conduct legal. If everyone in your industry is committing fraud, that means the goverment has alot of potential defendants – it dosent mean you get a pass. The Stanford case proved this. His attorneys argued that offshore banking and high-return CD marketing were common in the financial services industry. Didnt matter. 110 years.

Here’s the objection that defendants always raise: “Most Dallas professionals never face federal charges. Your exaggerating the risk. The business-friendly environment means federal prosecutors focus on real criminals, not legitimate businesspeople making mistakes.”

That objection sounds reasonable. Its statistically true that most professionals dont get prosecuted. And Texas is genuinely more business-friendly at the state level then alot of jurisdictions.

But heres the rebuttal: selection bias is exactly the point. Federal prosecutors dont bring weak cases. If your being investigated, the “most people arent charged” argument is irrelevant – YOU are in the small percentage they target. And the Stanford case proved that “legitimate businessperson” image means nothing. He had political connections, operated openly for years, seemed respectable. Got 110 years anyway.

The business-friendly state reputation creates OVERCONFIDENCE that makes investigations easier. Professionals think there protected by the local business culture. They talk to investigators without attorneys becuase they think explaining there business practices will clear things up. They dont destroy documents becuase they think they have nothing to hide. They dont invoke Fifth Amendment rights becuase they think that makes them look guilty.

All of that helps prosecutors build cases. Your not being compared to “most professionals” who never get charged. Your being compared to Allen Stanford, and prosecutors assume that Dallas professionals who run sophisticated operations are capable of sophisticated frauds. That assumption shapes how they investigate and how aggressively they prosecute.

The definitional gap is real. What you thought was “puffery” or “sales talk” or “optimistic projections,” prosecutors call false statements in furtherance of a scheme to defraud. What you thought was “billing optimization” or “maximizing reimbursement,” prosecutors call healthcare fraud. What you thought was “tax planning” or “minimizing liability,” prosecutors call tax evasion.

And once your indicted, explaining that you didnt understand you were breaking the law dosent help. Ignorance of law is not a defense. Good faith reliance on professional advice might be a defense – but only if you can prove you made full disclosure to the advisor and reasonably relied on there guidance. If you cherry-picked advice or didnt tell your attorney or accountant the full facts, that defense disappears.

What Actually Works in Northern District Federal Court

After everything Ive described – the Stanford legacy, the geographic prosecution advantages, the healthcare fraud targeting, the corporate infrastructure creating exposure, the cultural gap between business practices and federal law – you might be wondering what actually works. What can a federal criminal defense attorney do against this system?

The answer depends entirely on timing. If your being investigated but havent been charged yet, theres real opportunity for intervention. If your already indicted, your options narrow dramatically.

Pre-indictment is were experienced federal defense attorneys earn there fee. Sometimes we can prevent charges from being filed at all. We communicate with prosecutors, present mitigating information, shape the narrative before the goverment commits to an indictment. We provide context that investigators might not have. We explain legitimate business purposes for conduct that looks suspicious. We proffer cooperation if our client has information the goverment values more then prosecuting them.

The key is doing this before prosecutors have invested significant resources in building the case and before theyve presented it to a grand jury. Once an indictment is filed, prosecutors have publicly committed to the charges. Walking back becomes harder. There career advancement is now tied to convicting you.

Heres what pre-indictment intervention looks like in practice. You recieve a target letter or a grand jury subpoena. Or FBI agents show up at your business wanting to talk. Or your notified that your bank records have been subpoenaed. These are warnings that federal investigation is underway.

DO NOT talk to investigators without an attorney. DO NOT agree to “just answer a few questions to clear this up.” DO NOT provide documents beyond whats required by subpoena without counsel reviewing them first. Every single thing you say can be used against you, and investigators are trained to obtain admissions while making you feel like your helping yourself.

An experienced federal defense attorney can open communication channels with the prosecutor while protecting your rights. Sometimes we learn that your not actually the target – your just a witness or someone with information about the actual target. Sometimes we learn the investigation is civil, not criminal. Sometimes we can provide information that satisfies the goverments concerns without our client facing charges.

If charges seem inevitable, pre-indictment is when cooperation discussions happen. The goverment values cooperation more before indictment becuase it helps them build cases against others. After your indicted, your cooperation is worth less becuase they already have you. Cooperation can mean the difference between decades in prison and substantially reduced sentences through a 5K1.1 motion – but only if you have valuable information and your willing to testify.

Venue matters can sometimes be addressed pre-indictment. If were in communication with prosecutors before charges are filed, we can sometimes influence were the case gets brought. After indictment, venue is set and changing it requires showing that the chosen venue was improper – a high burden.

Post-indictment, the strategy shifts to damage control. With a 99% conviction rate, most cases resolve through plea agreements. The question becomes: can we negotiate a plea to lesser charges, can we get cooperation credit, can we present mitigation that influences sentencing, can we identify any constitutional violations that might suppress evidence or dismiss charges.

Sentencing is were alot of the work happens in federal court. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are complex. Calculating your guideline range correctly requires expertise. Identifying departures and variances requires knowing the case law. Presenting mitigation that judges actually care about requires understanding what factors matter in the Northern District.

Different judges in the Northern District have different sentencing patterns. Some follow the guidelines closely. Others vary downward or upward regularly. Knowing your judge’s history informs plea negotiations and sentencing strategy. If we know your judge typically sentences below the guidelines in white-collar cases, that strengthens our negotiating position with prosecutors. If your judge is known for harsh sentences in fraud cases, we need to adjust expectations and strategy.

Todd Spodek and the team at Spodek Law Group have represented clients in federal courts across the country, including complex white-collar cases in the Northern District of Texas. We understand that federal defense in Dallas isnt about the business-friendly reputation or assuming prosecutors will be reasonable. Its about meticulous preperation, strategic positioning, and knowing exactly when to fight and when to negotiate.

If your facing federal charges in Dallas – or if youve been contacted by federal agents and charges seem possible – dont wait. The federal goverment has likely been building there case for months or years. Every day you delay is a day they get stronger while your options narrow. Call 212-300-5196 for a consultation. We’ll give you an honest assessment of were you stand and what your options actually are.

This is serious. The Stanford case proved that Dallas respectability dosent protect you. Treat this accordingly.