Federal matters.

Why federal is different

A different system, not a harder version of the same one.

Federal practice has its own procedure, its own sentencing structure and its own timeline, and the differences are not cosmetic.

Cases are built for far longer before anyone is arrested. Agencies work a file quietly, sometimes for years, and by the time a person learns they are a defendant the government has usually finished most of its work.

The consequence runs against intuition: the most valuable moment in a federal case is normally the earliest one, and it often arrives disguised as something minor.

The letter that does not look like an emergency

Target, subject, witness.

Federal prosecutors sometimes tell people where they stand, in a letter. The words are not interchangeable.

A target is someone the government believes it has substantial evidence against. A subject is someone whose conduct is within the scope of the investigation. A witness is neither — for now.

The category can change without anyone writing to tell you, and people move from witness to subject to target on the strength of their own interview. That is the single most common way it happens.

A grand jury subpoena for records is the same event wearing different clothes. Producing documents without anyone reading them first can hand over the case.

What early work actually does

Understand the gap, then decide what to do with it.

The first job is unglamorous: work out what the government actually has, what it believes it has, and whether the distance between those two is where the case lives.

Where the answer favors the client, that can be presented before an indictment rather than after — to the line prosecutor, and sometimes above them. An indictment is a decision, and decisions are easier to influence before they are announced than after.

Where the answer does not favor the client, knowing that early is worth just as much. Exposure under the federal sentencing guidelines is driven by facts that can sometimes be affected while a case is still being shaped, and almost never after.

Proffers, and why they are not free

Talking to the government is a strategy, not a gesture.

A proffer — sitting down with prosecutors and agents under an agreement about how what is said may be used — can be the right move. It can also end a defense.

The protections in these agreements are narrower than people assume, and they commonly permit the government to use statements to rebut a position taken later at trial. That can quietly foreclose defenses that were available that morning.

It is a decision to make with counsel who has read the agreement, not one to make in a corridor.

Alongside trial counsel

Sometimes the right role is second chair.

Firms carrying a federal matter sometimes want a former prosecutor’s read of the file rather than a change of counsel. That is a normal arrangement and one this practice takes.

Questions people actually ask

The ones that come up every time.