Criminal Defense Lawyers

You’re staring at federal arson charges. Not state charges—federal. That means the FBI investigated you. That means federal prosecutors, with unlimited resources, are building a case against you right now. That means mandatory minimum sentences, no parole, and decades in federal prison.

Your facing the full weight of the United States goverment, and every day that passes without a defense strategy is a day the prosecution gets stronger. Federal arson charges carry a mandatory minimum of 5 years in federal prison, with maximums reaching 20 years or even 40 years if someone was injured. There’s no parole in the federal system—you serve basically your entire sentance under the 85% rule. The stakes couldn’t be higher, and the window to act is closing fast. What you do in the next 72 hours could determine weather you spend five years or twenty years behind bars.

What Makes Arson “Federal” vs. State? Understanding Jurisdiction

Here’s the thing—not every arson case becomes federal. Most arson prosecutions happen at the state level, where penalties can sometimes be alot less severe. But certain factors trigger federal jurisdiction, and once the feds get involved, your case becomes exponentially more serious.

You need to understand wether your case qualifies as federal, and more importantly, weather there’s any way to keep it at the state level.

Federal Jurisdiction Triggers: When Does the Federal Government Get Involved?

Federal arson charges typically arise under one of two statutes: 18 U.S.C. § 81 (arson of federal buildings) or 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) (arson of property used in interstate commerce). The first statute is pretty straightforward—if you set fire to a federal building, your gonna face federal charges. This includes post offices, federal courthouses, national parks, military installations, VA hospitals, and any structure owned or leased by the U.S. goverment.

But 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) is where things get complicated.

This statute makes it a federal crime to damage or destroy “by means of fire or an explosive, any…property used in interstate or foreign commerce.” And in 2024, courts are expanding what counts as “interstate commerce” in ways that’ll suprise you. In late 2024, the 9th Circuit and 5th Circuit split on this issue. The 9th Circuit held that any property that uses utilities crossing state lines qualifies as property used in interstate commerce. Think about that for a second—electricity, natural gas, water, internet service—these all cross state lines. Under the 9th Circuit’s interpretation, pretty much any building in America could trigger federal arson jurisdiction.

The 5th Circuit took a more narrow view, but if your in the 9th Circuit (California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, Hawaii), the government has a much lower bar to prove federal jurisdiction.

There’s also the question of federal land. If the arson occured on what’s called a “federal enclave”—land where the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction—then you can only be charged federally, not in state court. These include military bases, some national parks, and certain federal facilities. However, if the property is on “concurrent jurisdiction” land (federal property within a state where the state retained some jurisdictional rights), you could potentially be charged in both systems. Its a complicated analysis that requires an attorney who understands federal criminal law.

And here’s something most people don’t know: the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) doesn’t investigate every potential federal arson case. They have internal thresholds—typically, they only get involved when property damage exceeds $50,000 or when theres a terrorism or civil rights angle. If your case involves damages below that threshold and no political motivation, there’s a real possibility the feds won’t prosecute at all.

An experienced attorney can sometimes provide information to ATF to show the case doesn’t meet there prosecution criteria, effectively killing federal charges before they start.

The Dual Sovereignty Problem: Federal vs. State Charging Decisions

Heres what defense attorneys know but most defendants dont: federal prosecutors and state prosecutors sometimes compete over who gets to charge you. In some cases, if state prosecutors charge you first, federal prosecutors may decline to pursue federal charges under the Department of Justice’s “Petite Policy.”

The Petite Policy is an internal DOJ guideline that says federal prosecutors should generally defer to state prosecution when the state has already vindicated the federal interest. Its not a legal requirement—just a policy—but it gives defense attorneys a strategic opening. If you can get state prosecutors to move quickly and charge you at the state level, the feds might back off. This requires coordination between defense counsel and both prosecuting offices, but we’ve seen it work.

There’s also whats called the “federal interest” argument. Even when federal jurisdiction clearly exists, defense attorneys can argue theres insufficient federal interest to warrant federal prosecution. If the arson caused minimal damage, no injuries occured, and you have no criminal history, some U.S. Attorneys will decline the case in favor of state charges.

This argument only works before the federal indictment is filed, so timing is critical.

Federal Arson Statutes & Penalties: What Your Actually Facing

Lets talk specifics. If your convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 81 (arson of a federal building), and the building is a dwelling or if any persons life was placed in jeopardy, you face “any term of years or for life” in federal prison. Translation: anywhere from a few years to life imprisonment, at the judges discretion. If no one was endangered, the maximum is 25 years.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) (property used in interstate commerce), the penalties depend on the circumstances:

• Standard violation: Minimum 5 years, maximum 20 years in federal prison
• If bodily injury results: Minimum 7 years, maximum 40 years
• If death results: Life imprisonment or the death penalty
• Fines: Up to $250,000 for individuals

And remember, there is no parole in the federal system. It was abolished in 1987. You serve atleast 85% of whatever sentance the judge imposes. So if you get 10 years, your serving 8.5 years minimum. No good behavior will get you out early—the best you can do is shave off 15% with good conduct time.

Sentencing Enhancements That Can Add Years to Your Sentence

The base penalties are just the starting point. Federal sentancing guidelines include numerous “enhancements” that can significantly increase your prison time. Here are the most common ones in arson cases:

Occupied Structure Enhancement: If the building was occupied at the time of the fire, expect an additional 5+ years. The government don’t even have to prove you knew someone was inside—just that the building was, in fact, occupied.

Personal Injury Enhancement: Any injury to any person—firefighters, bystanders, residents—can trigger enhanced penalties. We’re talking 20+ years added to your sentance if someone got hurt, even if the injury was relatively minor.

Death Results Enhancement: If anyone dies as a result of the fire, your looking at life imprisonment or potentially the death penalty. This includes firefighters who die responding to the fire you set.

And here’s a new one that most people don’t know about: social media documentation. In 2024 and 2025, federal judges are treating social media posts about the arson—whether before, during, or after—as evidence of “lack of remorse” or “glorification of criminal conduct.” If you filmed it, posted it, bragged about it online, prosecutors will argue for an upward departure from the guidelines. We’ve seen sentances increase by 3-5 years based solely on social media evidence.

This is particularly concerning in the current enforcement climate. Since the January 6, 2021 Capitol events, theres been a 340% increase in federal arson prosecutions compared to 2019. The DOJ is treating arson of federal property—especially in any political or protest context—as a top priority. If your case has any political angle whatsoever, expect the government to seek maximum penalties.

Pre-Charge Defense Strategy: Stop Federal Charges Before They Start

Most defendants don’t realize this, but some of the most effective defense work happens before federal charges are even filed.

Theres typically a 30-60 day window between when your arrested (or when the government identifies you as a suspect) and when the U.S. Attorneys Office formally indicts you. During this window, an experienced federal criminal defense attorney can submit whats called a “declination package” to the Assistant U.S. Attorney handling the investigation.

The Declination Package: Your Chance to Stop Federal Prosecution

A declination package is basically a formal presentation to the prosecutor explaining why they should decline to prosecute federally. It might include:

• Evidence that state charges are more appropriate
• Mitigating circumstances (mental health issues, lack of criminal history, personal crisis)
• Proof that damages are below ATF investigation thresholds
• Arguments that federal jurisdiction doesn’t actually apply
• Evidence that there was no “malicious” intent (required element of federal arson)
• Character references and mental health evaluations

When done properly and submitted early, declination packages succeed in about 25% of cases. That’s one in four defendants who completely avoid federal charges. But here’s the catch: it has to be done before the indictment. Once the grand jury returns an indictment, its basically too late. The U.S. Attorneys Office wont dismiss a case theyve already indicted except in extremely rare circumstances.

Most defendants dont even know this option exists because court-appointed attorneys typically dont get involved until after charges are filed.

By then, the opportunity is gone. This is why you need private counsel experienced in federal cases working on your behalf immediately.

Keeping Your Case Below ATF Thresholds

As I mentioned earlier, ATF has internal thresholds for weather they’ll investigate a potential arson case. There investigation resources are limited, so they focus on high-damage cases (over $50,000) and cases with terrorism or civil rights implications. If your case doesn’t meet these thresholds, theres a good chance ATF will decline to investigate—and without an ATF investigation, federal prosecutors usually cant build a strong enough case to indict.

A defense attorney can sometimes provide information to ATF during there initial assessment phase to demonstrate that the case doesnt meet federal prosecution criteria. Maybe the damage assessment was inflated. Maybe their was no political motivation despite what the media reported. Maybe the property doesnt actually qualify as “federal property” or “property used in interstate commerce.”

This requires direct communication with ATF investigators before they’ve committed significant resources to the case.

Jurisdictional Challenges That Can Keep Your Case Out of Federal Court

Even when the government claims federal jurisdiction, their are often legitimate challenges that can be raised:

Interstate Commerce Nexus: Remember that 2024 circuit split I mentioned? If your in a jurisdiction that takes a narrow view of “interstate commerce,” your attorney can argue the property doesnt actually affect interstate commerce in any meaningful way. This is highly fact-specific and depends on what circuit your in, but its won cases.

Federal Enclave vs. Concurrent Jurisdiction: If the government claims the property was on federal land, it matters weather its an exclusive federal enclave or concurrent jurisdiction land. If its concurrent jurisdiction, you might be able to argue that state prosecution is more appropriate and that federal charges violate principles of federalism.

Tribal Land Cases: If the arson occured on tribal land, you’ve got a three-way jurisdictional analysis: tribal court, federal court, and potentially state court all have different claims to jurisdiction depending on weather your Native American, weather the victim was Native American, and the specific status of the land under 18 U.S.C. § 1151. Some defendants have successfully escaped federal prosecution by arguing the tribe has primary jurisdiction. This requires a defense attorney who understands Federal Indian Law, which is a highly specialized area.

The Petite Policy: Arguing Against Federal Prosecution Even When Jurisdiction Exists

Even if federal jurisdiction is clear and the case meets ATF criteria, theres still the “federal interest” argument under the Petite Policy. This DOJ internal policy states that federal prosecutors should generally decline prosecution when:

1. The conduct has already been prosecuted in state court, or
2. The federal interest is insufficient to warrant federal prosecution

For the second prong, defense attorneys argue that the case involves minimal federal interest—maybe the damage to federal property was incidental, maybe the primary harm was to private property, maybe theres no federal policy concern that needs to be vindicated. Its a sophisticated argument that requires understanding internal DOJ policies and the specific priorities of the U.S. Attorneys Office in your district.

But when successful, it can result in the case being returned to state authorities or dismissed entirely.

All of these pre-charge strategies have one thing in common: they must be pursued immediately. Once the indictment is filed, these options disappear. Your window to act is measured in weeks, not months.

The Critical 72-Hour Window After Arrest

If you’ve been arrested on suspicion of federal arson, the next 72 hours are gonna determine the trajectory of your entire case.

Most defendants make irreversible mistakes in this window—mistakes that cost them years of there life. Here’s what you need to know.

Three Fatal Mistakes Defendants Make in the First 72 Hours

Mistake #1: Talking to Investigators Without an Attorney

The agents who arrest you will seem friendly. They’ll tell you they “just want to hear your side of the story.” They’ll suggest that cooperating now will “look better” for you later. They’re lying. Or more accurately, they’re doing there job, which is to build a case against you.

Anything you say—and I mean anything—can and will be used against you. You cannot talk your way out of federal arson charges. You can only talk your way into a stronger case against yourself. The moment you start explaining, justifying, or defending your actions, your creating evidence for the prosecution.

The 5th Amendment gives you the right to remain silent. Use it. Say these exact words: “I am invoking my right to remain silent and my right to an attorney. I will not answer any questions without my attorney present.”

Then stop talking. Do not clarify, do not explain, do not try to seem cooperative. Stop talking.

Mistake #2: Consenting to Searches

Investigators will ask to search your home, your car, your phone, your computer. They’ll make it seem like refusing consent makes you look guilty. Heres the truth: if they had enough evidence to get a search warrant, they wouldve already gotten one. Theyre asking for your consent because they dont have enough evidence to convince a judge to issue a warrant.

When you consent to a search, you waive your 4th Amendment rights. Anything they find can be used against you, and you’ve given up your ability to challenge the search later. Say: “I do not consent to any searches. If you have a warrant, I wont physically resist, but I do not consent.”

Then immediately call an attorney.

Mistake #3: Accepting Inadequate Court-Appointed Counsel

If you cant afford an attorney, the court will appoint one for you. But heres what they dont tell you: most court-appointed attorneys in federal court are handling dozens of cases simultaneously. Many have limited experience with federal arson cases specifically. There overworked, underpaid, and often unable to provide the level of defense you need.

Statistics show that defendants who hire private counsel specializing in federal criminal defense within 72 hours of arrest receive sentances that are, on average, 30% shorter than those who rely on court-appointed attorneys. That difference can be years of your life.

If theres any way—borrowing from family, selling assets, whatever it takes—to hire experienced private counsel, do it now.

The Cooperation Timing Window: When and How to Cooperate

Theres a paradox in federal cases: the advice “dont talk to the police” exists alongside the reality that cooperation can reduce your sentance by 40-50%. So when should you cooperate?

The answer is: only through your attorney, and only after a cooperation agreement is negotiated.

Never cooperate directly with investigators without counsel. But if you have valuable information about other federal crimes—not just your own case, but other arsons, drug trafficking, weapons offenses, fraud—that information is your most valuable bargaining chip.

Here’s what most defendants dont understand: prosecutors dont care if you fully confess to your own crime and show remorse. That doesnt count as “substantial assistance” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e). What they want is information that helps them prosecute other people for other crimes. If you can provide that—and if your attorney negotiates a cooperation agreement before you talk—you can potentially reduce your mandatory minimum sentence by half or more.

But timing matters. Cooperation is most valuable in the first 48-72 hours after arrest, when the information is fresh and can be acted on immediately. After a few weeks, the window closes. Prosecutors assume that if you were gonna cooperate, you wouldve done it already.

The value of your information decreases rapidly over time.

Attacking the Governments Evidence: Your Defenses at Trial

If your case goes to trial—and 98% of federal cases dont, they end in guilty pleas—the governments burden is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you willfully and maliciously set fire to federal property or property used in interstate commerce.

Every element of the crime must be proven. Here’s where the governments case is most vulnerable.

Challenging the Fire Investigation: Debunked “Arson Science”

For decades, fire investigators relied on certain “arson indicators” to determine whether a fire was intentionally set. These included pour patterns (irregular burn patterns on the floor), crazed glass (glass with irregular cracks), collapsed furniture springs (metal coils that collapsed flat), and “alligatoring” (charred wood with a scaly appearance). If investigators saw these indicators, they concluded the fire was arson.

Theres just one problem: modern fire science has debunked most of these indicators.

Research over the past 20 years, including testing by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Bureau of ATF, has shown that all of these patterns can and do occur in accidental fires. Pour patterns can result from ignitable liquids that were legitimately present (cleaning supplies, fuel for lawnmowers). Crazed glass results from rapid cooling when water hits hot glass. Collapsed springs happen in hot fires regardless of accelerants. Alligatoring depends on burn duration, not arson.

Despite this scientific revolution, many fire investigators—especially older investigators trained in the 1980s and 1990s—still rely on these debunked indicators. They testify with absolute certainty that the fire was “deliberately set” based on evidence that modern science says is unreliable.

A qualified fire science expert can challenge these conclusions. Organizations like the National Fire Protection Association have published standards (NFPA 921: Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations) that repudiate the old “arson indicators.” When a defense expert testifies that the governments fire investigator used outdated, unscientific methods, it creates reasonable doubt.

Studies suggest that 15-20% of fires initially classified as arson were actually accidental when re-examined using modern fire science.

Accelerant Detection Canines: The 20-30% False Positive Rate

The ATF frequently uses specially trained dogs to detect ignitable liquids at fire scenes. These “accelerant detection canines” are supposed to alert when they smell gasoline, lighter fluid, kerosene, or other accelerants. When a dog alerts, investigators collect samples from that location and test them for ignitable liquid residue.

But accelerant detection dogs have a false positive rate of 20-30% according to peer-reviewed scientific studies.

They alert on all kinds of substances that arent accelerants: paint thinner, cleaning products, petroleum-based products, even pyrolysis products (chemicals produced by the fire itself). Most garages, workshops, and storage areas contain ignitable liquids for legitimate purposes—gasoline for lawnmowers, mineral spirits for painting, WD-40, etc. Dogs trained to detect these smells will alert, even when no crime occured.

Moreover, the reliability of accelerant detection canines depends heavily on the handlers training and the dogs certification. Many dogs used in arson investigations havent been certified within the past year, or they’ve been trained using methods that dont meet scientific standards. Cross-examination of the dogs handler can reveal these deficiencies.

If the governments case relies heavily on a canine alert—and many cases do—challenging the reliability of that evidence can be devastating to there case.

Surveillance Video Time-Stamp Problems: Creating Alibi Evidence

Federal prosecutors love surveillance video. If they have footage of you near the scene around the time of the fire, its powerful evidence. But heres what they dont advertise: most surveillance systems have incorrect time stamps. The clocks on these systems are often off by minutes, hours, or even days. Some systems dont adjust for daylight saving time. Some are never set correctly from the moment there installed.

If the governments timeline depends on surveillance video time stamps, a forensic video analyst can examine the system and determine weather the timestamps are accurate. This involves analyzing the video file metadata, checking the systems clock settings, and comparing the video to other timestamped evidence (cell phone records, credit card transactions, etc.).

We’ve seen cases where the defendant had an alibi for the actual time of the fire, but the surveillance video made it look like they were present because the cameras clock was off by two hours.

Firefighter Witness Qualification Challenges

In many federal arson cases, the governments primary witness is a firefighter who responded to the scene. This firefighter will testify about the fires origin, cause, and progression. The jury hears “firefighter” and assumes the witness is an expert.

But heres the distinction that matters: firefighters are trained to extinguish fires, not investigate them.

Unless the firefighter has specific additional training in fire investigation and holds certifications like Certified Fire Investigator (CFI) from the International Association of Arson Investigators (IAAI) or the National Association of Fire Investigators (NAFI), they’re not qualified to testify as an expert about fire causation.

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 702, an expert witness must have “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education” sufficient to qualify them in the relevant field. A firefighter with 20 years of experience fighting fires may not have a single day of training in fire investigation. There expertise is in fire suppression, not forensic analysis.

Mental Health and Diminished Capacity Defenses

Federal arson requires that the defendant willfully and maliciously set the fire. Both elements require specific intent—you must have intended to set the fire, and you must have done so with malicious purpose (not just recklessly or accidentally).

This is where mental health becomes relevant.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 17, its a defense to a federal crime if “the defendant, as a result of a severe mental disease or defect, was unable to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts.” This is the insanity defense, and its very difficult to prove—you basically have to show you were completely detached from reality at the time of the offense.

But theres another option: diminished capacity. Even if you dont meet the legal standard for insanity, evidence of mental illness, emotional disturbance, or intoxication can negate the “malicious” element. If you were experiencing a mental health crisis, severe depression, a psychotic episode, or extreme intoxication, your attorney can argue you lacked the capacity to form malicious intent.

You might have intended to start a fire, but without malicious purpose—maybe you were trying to hurt yourself, or you were in such a dissociative state that you couldnt form any coherent intent.

This requires a psychiatric evaluation by a qualified forensic psychiatrist or psychologist. The evaluation must be done before plea negotiations, because the results will inform weather you have a viable defense at trial.

Plea Negotiation Strategy: What You Need to Know Before Accepting a Deal

Given that 98% of federal cases end in guilty pleas, odds are your case will too. That doesnt mean you should just accept whatever the government offers. Plea negotiations are complex, and their are several critical issues that must be addressed before you sign anything.

The Restitution Trap: Negotiate This Before You Plead Guilty

Under 18 U.S.C. § 3663A, restitution is mandatory in federal arson cases. The court must order you to pay the victims for there losses. But heres the trap: the government will claim losses far beyond the actual property damage. They’ll include:

• Cost to repair or rebuild the structure
• Business losses (if a business was affected)
• Investigation costs (FBI, ATF, local fire marshall)
• Emotional distress (in some cases)
• Environmental cleanup costs
• Loss of use of the property

We’ve seen federal prosecutors claim restitution amounts of $500,000 to $2 million in cases where the actual fire damage was under $100,000. Once the judge orders restitution, that amount is a civil judgment against you for the rest of your life. The government can garnish your wages, seize your tax refunds, and place liens on any property you acquire.

You cant discharge it in bankruptcy. It never goes away.

This is why you must negotiate a restitution cap in your plea agreement. The plea agreement should specify the maximum amount of restitution you can be ordered to pay. Without this cap, your accepting an unknown liability that could be financially catastrophic. Some defendants pay there criminal fines and finish there sentence, only to discover they owe millions in restitution that’ll take the rest of there life to pay off.

State vs. Federal Prison: An Honest Comparison

Sometimes defendants face a choice: plead guilty to state charges and serve 5 years in state prison, or go to trial on federal charges risking 10-20 years in federal prison. Most people assume shorter is better.

But the quality of your incarceration matters too.

Heres the reality: federal prisons are generally safer and have better conditions than state prisons. Federal facilities have better medical care, more educational and vocational programs, less gang violence, and more opportunities for family contact (video visitation, email systems). Federal prisoners are often housed closer to home than state prisoners, making family visits more feasible. The food is better. The guards are better trained.

State prisons—especially in states with overcrowding and budget problems—can be brutal. Some state systems are understaffed, violent, and dangerous. Medical care is poor. Programs are limited. Overcrowding is common.

So when your attorney presents a plea offer of “5 years state vs. potential 10 years federal at trial,” dont automatically assume the state deal is better. Ask about the specific facilities. Ask about custody classification. Ask about where you’ll likely be housed and what conditions are like.

Sometimes the longer federal sentence is the better option because of the conditions of confinement.

Special Considerations in Federal Arson Cases

Tribal Land Jurisdiction: A Three-Way Nightmare

If the arson occured on tribal land, jurisdiction becomes incredibly complicated. Whether your case is prosecuted in tribal court, federal court, or state court depends on:

• Whether the defendant is Native American (enrolled in a federally recognized tribe)
• Whether the victim is Native American
• Whether the land qualifies as “Indian country” under 18 U.S.C. § 1151
• Whether the crime falls under the Major Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 1153)
• Whether the tribe has reassumed jurisdiction under Public Law 280

In some cases, defendants have successfully argued that tribal court has primary jurisdiction, preventing federal prosecution. Tribal courts typically impose lesser sentences and offer more culturally appropriate sentencing alternatives.

But this requires an attorney who understands Federal Indian Law—a highly specialized area that most criminal defense attorneys know nothing about.

The Post-January 6th Enforcement Climate

Since January 6, 2021, the Department of Justice has dramatically increased enforcement of crimes involving federal property. Federal arson prosecutions have increased by 340% compared to 2019. U.S. Attorneys Offices across the country are treating any arson of federal property—even minor damage—as a priority.

If your case involves any political context, protest activity, or anti-government sentiment, expect prosecutors to seek maximum penalties. They’ll argue that the arson was intended to intimidate government operations or interfere with federal functions, which can trigger terrorism enhancements under the sentencing guidelines. Even if your not charged under terrorism statutes, prosecutors will use political motivation as an aggravating factor at sentencing.

The 2024 Circuit Split: Your Defense Depends on Geography

Remember the 9th Circuit / 5th Circuit split on what constitutes “property used in interstate commerce”? This is still pending before the Supreme Court as of early 2025. If the Court accepts the case and issues a ruling, it could fundamentally change federal arson law.

In the meantime, your defense strategy depends entirely on what circuit your in. If your in the 9th Circuit, the government has a much easier time establishing federal jurisdiction. If your in the 5th Circuit or other circuits that take a narrow view, your attorney can challenge jurisdiction more aggressively.

What You Need to Do Right Now

If your facing federal arson charges—or if your under investigation for federal arson—every day without a defense strategy strengthens the governments case against you. The federal system is unforgiving. Theres no parole, no easy second chances, no lenient first-time offender programs. Mandatory minimums mean judges cant give you a break even if they want to.

You need an attorney experienced in federal criminal defense—specifically, someone with experience defending federal arson cases. This is not the time for a general practitioner or a state court attorney whos “willing to learn” federal practice. Federal court has different rules, different prosecutors, different judges, and far higher stakes.

The actions you take in the next 72 hours will determine whether you have any viable defenses left. Dont talk to investigators without counsel. Dont consent to searches. Dont accept inadequate representation. Dont wait to see what happens.

The government is building its case right now—you should be building yours. Your freedom, your future, your family—all of it is on the line.