Idaho Federal Crime Defense Attorney: Protecting Federal Defendants

Idaho Federal Crime Defense Attorney: Protecting Federal Defendants

The letter from the U.S. Attorney’s Office sits on your desk, and the words “target of a federal grand jury investigation” feel unreal. Or maybe FBI agents showed up at your Boise office yesterday, asking questions about transactions from 2021. Perhaps your business partner just called, frantic, saying federal prosecutors want him to cooperate—and your name keeps coming up. This isn’t a state criminal charge. This is different, and probably scarier then you realize.

Federal prosecutions in Idaho operate under completely different rules then state court. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Idaho has resources your local prosecutor could never imagine—multi-year investigations completed before you even knew you were a suspect, cooperation from every federal agency from the IRS to Homeland Security, and conviction rates that exceed 90%. Your attorney who handled that DUI in Ada County three years ago? They can’t help you here. Federal court requires attorneys admitted to practice before the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, and the procedural rules, sentencing guidelines, and strategic considerations are entirely seperate from state practice.

Here’s what most people don’t understand untill it’s to late: the decisions you make in the next 48 hours will determine whether you spend the next decade in federal prison or successfully navigate this crisis. Federal prosecutors have already built their case—the investigation that led to your target letter probably started 18 to 24 months ago. They’ve reviewed your bank records, emails, text messages, and interviewed witnesses. They know more about your conduct then you remember yourself.

And every statement you make to law enforcement from this point forward becomes evidence, even if your just trying to “explain the situation.”

Why Idaho’s Federal Court System Is Different From What You Expect

Idaho’s federal jurisdiction covers the entire state, but cases get assigned to divisional courts based off geography: Boise handles the southern division, Coeur d’Alene and Moscow serve the northern division, and Pocatello covers the eastern division. Where your case gets prosecuted matters more then most defendants realize. The jury pools are different—Boise tends toward more urban, diverse juries, while Pocatello and Idaho Falls draw from more rural, conservative populations that may be more skeptical of federal government overreach. Experienced federal defense attorneys understand these dynamics and, when possible, argue for venue in jurisdictions more favorable to defendants.

Chief Judge David C. Nye and the district’s other federal judges have distinct sentencing philosophies that savvy defense counsel exploit. Judge Nye has shown willingness to depart downward from sentencing guidelines for extraordinary family circumstances—sole caregivers for disabled children or elderly parents, for example—and gives significant weight to post-offense rehabilitation. Other judges focus more heavily on the offense conduct itself and are less swayed by personal mitigation. You can’t choose your judge (assignment is random), but understanding judicial tendencies helps your attorney craft sentencing arguments tailored to whoever draws your case.

Here’s a trap most defendants fall into: magistrate judges. Idaho’s federal district uses magistrate judges extensively for preliminary matters, and defendants can “consent” to having thier entire case heard by a magistrate instead of a district judge. Prosecutors sometimes encourage this, claiming it will speed things up and get you home faster. But magistrate judges in Idaho tend to sentence at or above guidelines more often then district judges, and they have less experiance with the complex departure arguments that can reduce your sentence by years. Never consent to magistrate jurisdiction without consulting experienced federal defense counsel—this decision is nearly impossible to reverse once you make it.

The geographic reality creates another problem: attorney availability. Boise and Coeur d’Alene have multiple attorneys with substantial federal criminal defense experience. Pocatello, Idaho Falls, Twin Falls? Very few. The Federal Defender Services of Idaho has offices in Boise and Coeur d’Alene but not in eastern Idaho. If your arrested in Pocatello on federal charges, you’ll probably need to hire an attorney from Boise (over two hours away), which significantly increases costs due to travel time. The alternative—hiring a local attorney who handles state crimes but has minimal federal experience—can be disastrous given how different federal procedure and sentencing is from state court.

Northern Idaho presents unique jurisdictional issues due to it’s proximity to Washington. Coeur d’Alene sits just 30 minutes from Spokane, and many federal offenses span both states. Federal prosecutors can choose to file charges in either the Eastern District of Washington or the District of Idaho. This choice matters enormously—Idaho juries tend to be more defense-friendly then Spokane’s urban jury pool. If you’re conduct occurred in both jurisdictions, your attorney needs to raise venue arguments early, ideally before indictment, because once charges are filed in Washington it’s very difficult to transfer them to Idaho.

What Federal Prosecutors Are Actually Targeting in Idaho Right Now

Look, here’s the deal: federal law enforcement priorities change, and what prosecutors aggressively pursued in 2019 might barely register in 2025. Understanding current enforcement priorities helps you assess your actual risk. Right now, in 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Idaho is prioritizing several specific categories.

Fentanyl cases dominate the docket. But the way prosecutors charge these cases changed dramatically in early 2025. Previously, possession of counterfeit pills containing fentanyl was charged based on actual fentanyl content—requiring expensive lab analysis showing X grams of pure fentanyl. Now, prosecutors use a “pill count method” where each pill is presumed to contain a certain amount, making the quantities sufficient for mandatory minimums much easier to prove. This matters in Idaho because counterfeit M30 pills (fake oxycodone containing fentanyl) are the dominant form of fentanyl in Boise, Idaho Falls, and Coeur d’Alene.

A person caught with what looks like a personal supply—say, 150 pills—could face a mandatory minimum of 5 years based on extrapolated weight calculations, even if they never sold drugs and had no intent to distribute. The math is brutal: 150 pills × presumed 0.5 grams each = 75 grams. Under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B), 40 grams of fentanyl triggers a 5-year mandatory minimum. You can’t negotiate below that without a cooperation agreement, and the judge has no discretion to go lower even if they want to help you.

The COVID fraud reckoning is still happening. Most people think pandemic fraud prosecutions ended in 2022—they didn’t. The statute of limitations for PPP fraud, EIDL fraud, and unemployment fraud is 5 years, which means cases from 2020 can be charged through 2025. Idaho saw over 17,000 potentially fraudulent applications flagged by the SBA’s Office of Inspector General, and prosecutors are working through them systematically. The first wave (2021-2022) targeted obvious fraud: fake businesses, stolen identities. The current wave is more sophisticated: legitimate businesses that inflated employee counts, owners who claimed PPP loans while maintaining offshore accounts, contractors who misrepresented project costs.

If you recieved any pandemic-related loans or unemployment benefits between 2020-2022, even if you beleived you qualified, you could be under investigation now. The thresholds are lower then you’d expect—prosecutors are charging cases involving as little as $20,000 in PPP fraud, whereas typical federal wire fraud cases usually require $100,000+ to trigger federal prosecution. This is a policy priority, and it’s driving prosecution decisions that would normally be declined.

Cryptocurrency crimes are accelerating in Idaho, particularly in Boise’s growing tech sector. The IRS Criminal Investigation unit is prioritizing unreported crypto gains (treated as tax evasion), crypto used to hide assets during bankruptcy proceedings, and unlicensed money transmission (running crypto ATMs or exchanges without proper licensing). Here’s the trap: people think crypto is anonymous—it’s not. Federal agencies use blockchain analysis tools like Chainalysis and TRM Labs that trace transactions with stunning accuracy. Cases from 2019-2020 are being charged now because investigators needed years to trace the blockchain. If you thought you got away with something in the early crypto days, the indictment might be coming this year.

Methamphetamine prosecutions focus on mid-level distributors connected to Mexican cartels operating in Boise, Twin Falls, and Idaho Falls. Federal prosecutors aren’t interested in users or low-level dealers—they want defendants who can provide information about suppliers and distribution networks. The typical federal meth case involves 50+ grams (about 2 ounces), often with firearms enhancements that add years to sentences. The cooperation economy is brutal: the first person to flip gets the best deal, and prosecutors have no incentive to negotiate with the fourth or fifth cooperator because they’ve already got the testimony they need.

Firearms trafficking across state lines is a priority due to Idaho’s proximity to Washington and Oregon, which have stricter gun laws. ATF investigations target “straw purchasers” (buying guns for prohibited persons) and illegal gun sales across state lines. What seems like a favor to a friend—buying a gun for someone who can’t pass a background check—is a federal felony under 18 U.S.C. § 922, and prosecutors charge these cases aggressively. The penalties are harsh: up to 10 years for straw purchasing, and if that firearm is later used in a crime, additional charges and sentencing enhancements apply.

The Economics of Federal Prosecution: Who Actually Gets Charged

Federal prosecutors have limited resources and decline many cases, referring them to state court or choosing not to prosecute at all. Understanding what they won’t charge helps you assess your risk profile and, if your attorney intervenes early enough, potentially avoid federal charges entirely.

Drug cases have unwritten thresholds. Methamphetamine cases generally won’t be prosecuted federally unless they involve 50+ grams or include firearms. Fentanyl is the exception—prosecutors will charge cases as small as 10 grams (approximately 100 pills) due to current policy priorities. Marijuana? Virtually no federal prosecutions in Idaho unless it’s a massive grow operation or interstate trafficking. Cocaine typically needs 500+ grams to trigger federal interest. Prescription fraud usually stays state-level unless it involves physicians or pharmacists in a conspiracy.

White collar crime has dollar thresholds that matter. Bank fraud typically requires $50,000+ in losses to trigger federal prosecution. Wire fraud usually needs $100,000+. But PPP and EIDL fraud from the pandemic? They’re prosecuting cases as low as $20,000 due to the political pressure to “recover taxpayer money.” Tax evasion rarely gets prosecuted unless it involves $100,000+ in evaded taxes over multiple years—the IRS Criminal Investigation unit handles maybe 2,000-3,000 cases nationally each year out of millions of tax returns, so they focus on the most egregious cases.

Here’s what most people don’t know: if your under investigation and the amounts are below federal thresholds, an experienced attorney can sometimes negotiate with federal prosecutors to decline the case and refer it to state court. This results in dramatically better outcomes—state prison instead of federal, shorter sentences, and eligibility for parole (which doesn’t exist in the federal system). But this requires early intervention.

Once the grand jury returns an indictment, it’s to late. The decision to decline has already been made—against you.

Target letters represent your best opportunity. If you receive a letter from the U.S. Attorney’s Office stating your a “target” of a grand jury investigation, you have a narrow window—typically 30 to 60 days—before the grand jury meets and returns an indictment. During this window, your attorney can present a defense, demonstrate why federal prosecution isn’t warranted, or negotiate pre-indictment cooperation. Success rates for preventing indictment entirely are approximately 15-20% if you intervene during this window. Once indicted, your chance of outright dismissal drops to less then 3%.

The cooperation economy drives everything in federal court. Prosecutors need defendants to flip on bigger targets—that’s how they build cases against organizational leaders, drug suppliers, and fraud masterminds. Understanding your value as a cooperator is critical, and it’s not what most people think.

High-value cooperators get the best deals: mid-level drug dealers who can testify against suppliers, employees of fraudulent businesses who can testify against owners, junior members of conspiracies who can describe the leadership structure, and people with direct knowledge of violence or firearms. Low-value cooperators get minimal benefit: end-user drug buyers with no supplier knowledge, people whose testimony is duplicative (others are already cooperating), and defendants whose credibility is too damaged by extensive criminal history.

Timing matters desperately. The first cooperator gets the best deal—often a recommendation for substantial sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) or U.S.S.G. § 5K1.1. The second and third cooperators get diminishing returns. By the fourth or fifth, prosecutors don’t need you anymore. This creates a game theory problem: your co-defendants know this too, and right now, while your reading this, one of them might already be sitting in a prosecutor’s office making a deal. By the time you decide to cooperate, the opportunity may have passed.

The “relevant conduct” trap destroys defendants who don’t understand federal sentencing. Federal guidelines count ALL relevant conduct, not just what your convicted of. Charged with distributing 100 grams of meth, but the investigation shows you sold 500 grams over two years? You’re sentenced based on 500 grams. Convicted of one count of wire fraud, but the scheme involved 50 transactions? You’re sentenced based on the total loss from all 50. Prosecutors exploit this by charging narrow indictments (easier to prove at trial) but presenting expansive relevant conduct at sentencing. Defense attorneys must challenge relevant conduct aggressively—it often matters more then the conviction itself.

What a Federal Defense Attorney Actually Costs in Idaho

Let’s talk about money, because this is probably one of the first things your wondering and nobody wants to give you a straight answer. Federal criminal defense in Idaho costs anywhere from $15,000 to over $100,000, depending on the complexity of your case, the attorney’s experience, and how far the case goes.

Most federal defense attorneys require an upfront retainer fee, which starts at $5,000 to $10,000 for relatively straightforward cases (single-count indictments, plea negotiations) and can run $25,000 to $50,000+ for complex white collar cases or cases going to trial. Hourly rates range from $150 per hour for newer attorneys to $500-$1,000+ per hour for attorneys with extensive federal trial experience. In Boise, the average experienced federal criminal defense attorney charges $300-$450 per hour.

Trial costs are where expenses explode. A federal trial typically costs $20,000 to $75,000+ when you include preparation time (40-100+ hours), expert witnesses, investigators, jury consultants, and the trial itself. This doesn’t include appeal costs if you lose. Most defendants can’t afford this, which is one reason why over 97% of federal cases resolve through plea agreements rather then trials. The economics of federal defense create immense pressure to plead guilty even when you have defensible cases.

Public defender eligibility depends on your income and assets. The Federal Defender Services of Idaho represents defendants who can’t afford private counsel, but “can’t afford” has specific financial criteria. Generally, if your household income is at or below 125% of the federal poverty guidelines and you don’t have significant assets, you qualify. But here’s the catch—the quality of federal public defenders is actually very high. Federal defenders handle federal cases exclusively, they know the prosecutors and judges, and they’re often more experienced in federal court then private attorneys who handle mostly state cases.

The mistake defendants make is hiring a state criminal attorney who doesn’t practice in federal court regularly. State court experience doesn’t translate—federal sentencing guidelines are infinitely more complex then state sentencing, federal rules of evidence and procedure are different, and the strategic considerations (cooperation, relevant conduct, guideline calculations) require specialized knowledge. An attorney who’s excellent at state DUI defense but has handled three federal cases in their career is going to miss critical opportunities and make mistakes that cost you years in prison.

What should you ask in a consultation? How many federal criminal cases have you handled in the past two years? What percentage of your practice is federal vs. state? Are you admitted to practice in the District of Idaho federal court? Have you handled cases involving the specific charges I’m facing? What’s your experience with the prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney’s Office? Do you have relationships with the federal judges? These questions separate attorneys who actually practice federal criminal defense from those who are willing to take your money but lack the expertise you need.

Pre-indictment representation is the most valuable legal service you can buy, but most people don’t know it exists. If you’ve received a target letter or know your under investigation, hiring an attorney immediately—before charges are filed—gives you the best chance of avoiding prosecution entirely or negotiating favorable cooperation terms. This is when your attorney can present a defense to prosecutors, demonstrate why the case shouldn’t be charged federally, or structure cooperation agreements that provide maximum benefit. Once your indicted, these options disappear. Pre-indictment representation typically costs $10,000-$25,000, which sounds expensive untill you realize it could prevent a 5-year prison sentence.

Federal Sentencing: The Math That Determines Your Life

Federal sentencing operates under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, a complex mathematical system that calculates your sentence based on offense characteristics, criminal history, and aggravating or mitigating factors. Understanding this math is essential because the difference between one guideline level can mean years in prison.

Every federal offense has a “base offense level” that starts the calculation. Drug trafficking base offense levels are determined by drug quantity. Fraud base offense levels are determined by dollar loss. From there, “specific offense characteristics” add or subtract levels: Did you use a firearm? Add 2 levels. Were you a leader or organizer? Add 2-4 levels. Did you obstruct justice? Add 2 levels. Each level increase adds months to your sentence.

Mandatory minimums override the guidelines. Certain offenses carry statutory mandatory minimum sentences that judges cannot go below, regardless of what the guidelines say. Fentanyl trafficking (40+ grams): 5-year mandatory minimum. Methamphetamine trafficking (50+ grams): 5-year mandatory minimum. Firearms trafficking: up to 10 years. Child pornography production: 15-year mandatory minimum. The only way to get below a mandatory minimum is through a cooperation agreement where prosecutors file a motion for substantial assistance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e).

The “trial penalty” is real and brutal. If you plead guilty and accept responsibility, you receive a 2-3 level reduction in your offense level, which typically translates to 12-18 months less prison time. If you go to trial and lose, you don’t get this reduction. This creates a penalty for exercising your constitutional right to trial—you’ll serve significantly longer if you go to trial and are convicted then if you plead guilty to the exact same offense. In Idaho federal court, only 2-3% of cases go to trial, not because defendants are all guilty, but because the trial penalty makes trial economically irrational for most defendants.

The Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) is the most important document in your case, and most defendants don’t realize it exists untill it’s almost to late. After you plead guilty or are convicted at trial, a U.S. Probation officer prepares a detailed report that calculates your sentencing guidelines, includes your criminal history, describes the offense, and recommends a sentence. This document is more important then your trial or guilty plea because it determines the guideline range the judge starts with.

Here’s what experienced attorneys know: you have 14 days after receiving the PSR to file objections. Your attorney should comb through every page looking for incorrect criminal history calculations, wrong drug quantity calculations, unsupported relevant conduct, and missing mitigating factors. Probation officers are generally fair, but they rely on information from prosecutors, and if you don’t challenge inaccuracies in the PSR, they become “facts” at sentencing. I’ve seen cases where challenging the drug quantity calculation in the PSR reduced a defendant’s guideline range by 5 levels—the difference between 8 years and 4 years.

The “safety valve” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) allows judges to sentence below mandatory minimums for certain drug offenses if you meet specific criteria: minimal or no criminal history, no violence or weapons, you weren’t a leader or organizer, and you provide complete truthful disclosure to prosecutors. But here’s the trap: the “truthful disclosure” requirement is dangerous. Defendants confess to everything, thinking they’re qualifying for safety valve, and prosecutors use those confessions to expand relevant conduct. The defendant ends up with a higher sentence then if they’d stayed silent. Experienced federal defense attorneys know how to navigate safety valve disclosure strategically—most state criminal attorneys don’t.

Departures and variances are how good attorneys reduce sentences. Departures are reductions based on factors not adequately considered by the guidelines. Variances are when judges exercise discretion under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) to impose sentences outside the guideline range. Based on Idaho federal court patterns, certain departures actually work: extraordinary family circumstances (sole caregiver for disabled child or elderly parent), aberrant behavior (single lapse by otherwise law-abiding person), and post-offense rehabilitation (completing treatment, obtaining employment, pursuing education before sentencing). Departures that rarely work: harsh conditions of confinement, general remorsefulness without concrete actions, and addiction as explanation (judges expect treatment, not leniency).

Supervised release is the trap that sends defendants back to prison years after their case ends. Every federal sentence includes supervised release (federal probation after prison), typically 3-5 years for most offenses. Conditions include random drug testing, warrantless searches of your home, computer monitoring, travel restrictions, and association restrictions. Violations are extremely common—over 50% of federal defendants violate supervised release—and violations send you back to prison for years. Yet most defendants focus only on the prison sentence and don’t realize supervised release conditions are negotiable at the front end. By the time they violate and face revocation, it’s too late to negotiate the conditions they should have fought against at sentencing.

Critical Decisions in Chronological Order

Federal cases unfold in stages, and each stage presents critical decisions that determine your outcome. Understanding these decision points helps you avoid catastrophic mistakes.

Decision Point 1: First Contact with Law Enforcement

FBI agents show up at your home or workplace. You receive a grand jury subpoena. Local police arrest you and mention “federal agents are interested.” Your mental state: panic, confusion, overwhelming impulse to “explain yourself” and make this go away.

Critical decision: DO NOT speak to federal agents without an attorney present, even if your innocent. DO NOT consent to searches even if you have “nothing to hide.” DO immediately contact a federal criminal defense attorney. You cannot talk your way out of a federal investigation. Statements you make—even truthful, exculpatory statements—will be used against you. Agents are trained to elicit statements that seem innocent but establish elements of offenses or provide probable cause for searches.

Decision Point 2: Receiving a Target Letter

You receive a letter from the U.S. Attorney’s Office stating your a “target” of a grand jury investigation and inviting you to provide information or testify. Your mental state: terror, desperate desire to fix the situation, belief that cooperation will help.

Critical decision: DO show the target letter to a federal defense attorney immediately. DO NOT contact prosecutors directly. DO explore pre-indictment intervention options. DO NOT testify to the grand jury without an immunity agreement. Target letters typically come late in investigations—70-80% of targets get indicted—but this is your best chance to avoid indictment entirely through attorney negotiation. You have a narrow window (30-60 days typically) before the grand jury returns an indictment.

Decision Point 3: Arrest and Initial Appearance

Federal agents arrest you. You appear before a magistrate judge for initial appearance. The judge addresses bail and detention. Your mental state: overwhelming fear, urgency to get out of jail, temptation to make statements to show your cooperative.

Critical decision: DO remain silent and invoke your Fifth Amendment right. DO NOT discuss your case with cellmates or on jail phones (all calls are recorded). DO request an appointed attorney if you cannot afford one. DO understand bail is different in federal court—there are no bail bondsmen, and you must meet statutory criteria under 18 U.S.C. § 3142. Certain charges (serious drug offenses, crimes of violence) trigger a presumption of detention, meaning you may remain in custody until trial (which could be months or years away) unless your attorney presents strong evidence at the detention hearing.

Decision Point 4: Cooperation vs. Going to Trial

The prosecutor offers a plea agreement that requires cooperation—providing information on others, testifying against co-defendants. You must decide whether to cooperate or proceed to trial. Your mental state: moral conflict, fear of retaliation, uncertainty about what co-defendants are doing.

Critical decision: DO understand exactly what cooperation requires (what information must you provide, what testimony is expected, what benefit do you receive). DO assess whether you have information prosecutors actually need. DO consider whether co-defendants are cooperating (the first cooperator gets the best deal). DO NOT assume cooperation automatically equals leniency—it must be “substantial assistance” as determined by prosecutors.

Cooperation is complex. Some defendants cooperate extensively and receive minimal benefit because their information wasn’t valuable. Others provide limited cooperation and receive huge sentence reductions because they testified against key targets. You need an attorney to assess your cooperation value realistically, not optimistically.

Decision Point 5: Plea Agreement vs. Trial

The prosecutor offers a plea agreement with a sentencing recommendation. You must decide: plead guilty to certainty, or go to trial risking a much longer sentence if convicted. Your mental state: desperation for certainty, fear of trial, resentment at pleading guilty when facts are disputed.

Critical decision: DO analyze the sentencing guidelines calculation under the plea agreement. DO understand what you lose if you go to trial (acceptance of responsibility reduction, typically 12-18 months). DO assess trial odds realistically (federal conviction rate exceeds 90%). DO NOT plead guilty without understanding exactly what prison time your actually facing. Plea agreements in federal court are binding—once you plead guilty, you generally cannot withdraw the plea. You need to understand the guidelines calculation, what enhancements apply, and what arguments for downward departure exist before you plead.

Taking Action When Everything Feels Impossible

If your reading this, your probably in crisis mode. Maybe you got a target letter yesterday. Maybe agents interviewed your employees last week. Maybe your co-defendant just told you they’re cooperating and you need to “get a lawyer, like, today.” The paralysis is real—you don’t know who to trust, you can’t afford to make the wrong decision, and everything feels urgent but also impossible to navigate.

Start here: contact federal defense attorneys today. Not tomorrow, not next week, today. In Idaho, look for attorneys admitted to practice in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho. Ask about their federal caseload specifically. Ask whether they’ve handled cases involving your charges in the past 18 months. Ask about their relationships with the U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecutors.

Bring everything to your consultation: target letters, grand jury subpoenas, any correspondence from federal agencies, any search warrants or seizure documents. Bring a timeline of events as you understand them. Bring questions: What are they actually investigating? What’s the likely outcome? What decisions do I need to make immediately vs. what can wait? What’s the cost structure—retainer, hourly, flat fee?

Red flags to watch for: attorneys who guarantee outcomes (no ethical attorney can guarantee results in federal court), attorneys who pressure you to decide immediately without explaining options, attorneys whose practice is primarily state court but they’re “willing to handle” your federal case, and attorneys who can’t explain federal sentencing guidelines in terms you understand.

The timeline matters more then you think. If you’ve received a target letter, you probably have 30-60 days before indictment. If agents have contacted you but no target letter yet, you might have more time—or the investigation might be in early stages where intervention could prevent charges. If your already indicted, the timeline compresses: initial appearance within days, arraignment within weeks, detention hearing that determines whether you stay in custody, discovery that reveals the government’s evidence.

Not every federal investigation results in charges. Not every indictment results in conviction. Not every conviction results in maximum sentences. Federal cases are winnable—but only if you understand the system, make strategic decisions, and engage experienced counsel immediately. The difference between devastation and survival often comes down to what you do in the next 48 hours, and whether you…