No federal trial court in the country looks like the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In fiscal year 2024, 19.4% of the people sentenced there had gone to trial — nearly seven times the 2.8% national rate — and offenses against the administration of justice, a rounding error in most districts, were its single largest sentencing category. This is the courthouse where federal power is prosecuted, defended, and tested, and cases here demand counsel built for that environment.
This page is about the trial court itself — the fifteen-judgeship bench at the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse, the only U.S. Attorney’s Office in America that prosecutes both local and federal crime, the data that define its docket, and the appellate and post-conviction routes that follow judgment. Elizabeth Franklin-Best is admitted to practice before this court — one of seven federal district courts where she holds standing admission — and Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C. handles federal defense, appeals, and post-conviction matters nationwide. Her recognitions include selection to the 2026 Best Lawyers in America list as a “Best Lawyer” in Appellate Practice and a Chambers USA 2026 ranking for Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations. This page belongs to our federal courts directory.
If your matter — an investigation, an indictment, or a judgment already entered — sits in the District of Columbia, we offer a paid, one-hour initial consultation to evaluate it with you.
Table of Contents
Quick Answer: District of Columbia
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is the court? | The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia — under 28 U.S.C. § 88, the District of Columbia constitutes a single judicial district, with court held at Washington. |
| Where is the courthouse? | The E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse, 333 Constitution Avenue NW, shared with the D.C. Circuit. |
| How many judges? | Fifteen authorized judgeships under 28 U.S.C. § 133, led as of mid-2026 by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg, with senior and magistrate judges alongside. |
| Who prosecutes? | The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia — the only USAO that handles both local D.C. Code crimes and federal crimes. Jeanine Pirro was confirmed by the Senate as U.S. Attorney on August 2, 2025. |
| What makes the docket unusual? | FY2024 data: administration-of-justice offenses were 20.3% of sentencings (1.1% nationally), trials produced 19.4% of dispositions (2.8% nationally), and immigration cases were essentially absent. |
| Where do appeals go? | Federal convictions are reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in the same building; D.C. Code convictions go to the D.C. Court of Appeals instead. |
| What deadlines follow judgment? | The criminal notice of appeal is due within 14 days; a § 2255 motion is filed in this district, generally within a year of finality. |
| How does the firm engage? | Elizabeth Franklin-Best holds standing admission to this court — no pro hac vice motion needed — and new matters begin with a paid, one-hour initial consultation. |
Key Takeaways
- The District of Columbia is one judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 88; its federal trial court sits at the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse on Constitution Avenue.
- Fifteen authorized judgeships make this one of the largest single-courthouse benches in the country; Chief Judge James E. Boasberg leads it as of mid-2026.
- Washington runs on a dual court system: federal crimes are tried in this court, while most local D.C. Code offenses are tried in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.
- One office prosecutes in both systems — the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia — a dual role no other USAO carries.
- The FY2024 docket was singular: administration-of-justice offenses at 20.3% of sentencings, assault at 14.2%, and zero immigration cases.
- Fischer v. United States, 603 U.S. 480 (2024) — a case that began in this district — narrowed 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) to obstruction that impairs evidence, forcing reassessment of charges across this court’s docket.
- Trials matter here: 19.4% of FY2024 sentencings followed trial, against a 2.8% national rate.
- Appeals from federal convictions go to the D.C. Circuit upstairs in the same courthouse, on a 14-day notice deadline; § 2255 motions come back to this district.
- Elizabeth Franklin-Best holds standing admission to this court — one of seven district courts where she is admitted — so our firm can appear without case-by-case motions.
The District of Columbia at a Glance
Under 28 U.S.C. § 88, the District of Columbia constitutes one judicial district, and court is held at Washington — no divisions, no satellite courthouses. Everything happens at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse at 333 Constitution Avenue NW, which the trial court shares with the D.C. Circuit that reviews its judgments.
The capital’s court architecture confuses even lawyers. Because D.C. is not a state, Congress created two parallel systems: this federal district court for federal crimes, and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for most local D.C. Code offenses, whose appeals go to the D.C. Court of Appeals rather than the D.C. Circuit. Which courthouse a charge lands in determines the judge pool, the sentencing law, and the appellate path — so confirming the forum is step one in any D.C. case.
Within the federal system, this district’s caseload skews toward matters that exist nowhere else in volume: offenses against government functions, cases touching national agencies and officials, and prosecutions in which the federal government itself is, in a real sense, the alleged victim. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and the court’s local rules supply the procedure; the institutional setting supplies the pressure.
Fifteen Judgeships, One Courthouse: The Bench
Congress gives this district fifteen judgeships under 28 U.S.C. § 133 — a remarkable allocation for a jurisdiction of fewer than 700,000 residents, and a measure of how much national litigation flows through it. As of mid-2026 the court is led by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg, with the active bench supplemented by senior judges who continue to carry substantial calendars and magistrate judges who handle initial appearances, detention hearings, and warrant practice.
Judges here decide questions most district judges never see — disputes over executive privilege, grand-jury fights involving federal agencies, classified-information procedures under CIPA — alongside ordinary criminal trials. The bench is correspondingly experienced with high-profile defendants and saturation press coverage, and so is the courthouse itself. We prepare clients for that reality early, because in this building publicity is a litigation condition, not an anomaly.
A Docket Found Nowhere Else: The FY2024 Numbers
The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s FY2024 packet for the District of Columbia describes a docket without parallel. Of 536 sentenced individuals, 20.3% were sentenced for offenses against the administration of justice — obstruction-family offenses that account for just 1.1% of cases nationally. Assault stood at 14.2% (versus 1.5%), burglary and trespass at 7.5% (versus 0.2%), and bribery and corruption at more than four times the national share. Immigration prosecutions — 30% of the national docket — numbered zero.
Then there is the trial rate. Guilty pleas resolve 97.2% of federal cases nationwide, but only 80.6% here: 104 of the district’s FY2024 sentencings followed trial. Defendants in this courthouse exercise trial rights at nearly seven times the national rate, and both the bench and the prosecution office are conditioned to trying cases rather than assuming pleas.
The obstruction side of that docket was reshaped by Fischer v. United States, 603 U.S. 480 (2024), a case that originated in this district. The Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) reaches only conduct that impairs the availability or integrity of evidence — records, documents, or other objects used in an official proceeding — rejecting the broader reading under which the statute covered obstructive conduct generally. The decision forced case-by-case review of pending and resolved § 1512(c)(2) charges in this court, and it remains the controlling frame for any obstruction indictment here.
One Prosecutor’s Office, Two Court Systems
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia carries a portfolio no other office has: because the capital has no state government, the same office charges local D.C. Code offenses in Superior Court and federal offenses in this district court. That structure makes it among the largest U.S. Attorney’s offices in the country and gives its leadership unusual reach over everyday criminal enforcement in the city. Jeanine Pirro, nominated to succeed Matthew M. Graves, was confirmed by the Senate as U.S. Attorney on August 2, 2025 by a 50–45 vote.
On the federal side, the office’s docket runs from public corruption and national-security matters to financial crime of global scale. Two recent examples show the range: the Bitfinex money-laundering prosecution — built on the largest financial seizure in Justice Department history — ended with a § 1956(h) guilty plea and a 60-month sentence imposed in this courthouse in November 2024 for laundering billions in stolen bitcoin; and in 2023, a federal jury here convicted a well-known entertainer for an undisclosed foreign-influence campaign, one of the Foreign Agents Registration Act’s most prominent trial tests.
Corruption law itself has tightened in defendants’ favor. In Snyder v. United States, 603 U.S. 1 (2024), the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 666 criminalizes bribes — payments arranged before an official act — and not after-the-fact gratuities. For the officials, lobbyists, and contractors who populate this district’s corruption docket, the line between a bribe, a gratuity, and lawful conduct is now ground that has to be litigated, not assumed.
Federal Criminal Cases in the District
For all its singular features, this court also runs a conventional federal criminal calendar — white-collar matters, fraud against agencies and programs headquartered blocks away, drug and firearms prosecutions from the city itself, and the public-corruption cases for which the venue is famous.
Whatever the charge, the procedural sequence holds: an investigation that may announce itself through a target letter or grand jury subpoena; an indictment; the initial appearance and arraignment; pretrial motions and discovery; a plea or trial; and sentencing. Our federal criminal process hub covers each step in depth.
What changes in this district is the texture: investigations staffed by agencies with their own inspectors general, discovery laced with classified or privileged material, and grand juries that sit at the center of national disputes. Defending here means litigating those layers, not just the elements of the offense.
Applied Insight: Because nearly one in five cases in this district is resolved by trial, prosecutors here price pleas against a real possibility of trying the case. That changes negotiation leverage in the defendant’s favor — but only when the defense is visibly prepared to try it. Building trial readiness from day one is not bravado in this courthouse; it is bargaining position.
Appeals and Post-Conviction Matters
Appellate review of this court’s judgments happens in the same building: the D.C. Circuit sits above the district court at the Prettyman Courthouse, and a defendant has exactly 14 days from entry of judgment to notice the appeal. Given how many of this district’s convictions follow contested trials, appellate records here are long, technical, and rich with preserved issues — which is exactly the terrain where our practice lives.
Beyond direct review, a prisoner attacking a conviction or sentence from this court files a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion in this district, and our federal post-conviction relief practice handles those proceedings along with compassionate release motions under § 3582(c)(1)(A). Compassionate release here is governed by the D.C. Circuit’s framework in United States v. Wilson, 77 F.4th 837 (D.C. Cir. 2023), which treats the statute’s exhaustion requirement as a non-jurisdictional claim-processing rule and holds that a change in law, standing alone, is not an extraordinary and compelling reason for release — the same limit the Supreme Court later drew nationally. These motions are decided sparingly: across fiscal year 2025 the courts granted 14.1% of compassionate-release requests nationwide. One caution unique to Washington: a conviction under the D.C. Code follows an entirely different review path — to the D.C. Court of Appeals — so the remedy depends on which system produced the judgment.
How the Firm Practices in This Court
Elizabeth Franklin-Best holds standing admission to the bar of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia — one of seven federal district courts where she is admitted to practice. In this particular court that matters more than usual: under the court’s own procedures, an outside lawyer appearing pro hac vice must find a sponsoring member of the court’s bar, file a motion with a certificate of good standing under LCvR 83.2(c) or LCrR 44.1(c), and pay a fee in every individual case. Standing admission removes that gatekeeping entirely — we can enter an appearance the day we are retained.
She is also admitted to the D.C. Circuit, which reviews every federal conviction from this courthouse, and to the U.S. Supreme Court, where a meaningful share of this district’s criminal law — Fischer and Snyder among the recent examples — is ultimately settled. For a docket this appellate-minded, that continuity from trial court to certiorari is the structural advantage we offer.
That continuity rests on a substantial federal record. Our principal attorney, Elizabeth Franklin-Best, has handled more than 330 federal proceedings, including over 100 appeals, and has represented defendants and petitioners in all twelve federal courts of appeals and at the U.S. Supreme Court. Alongside her admission here, she maintains a nationwide federal post-conviction practice — 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions, capital habeas, First Step Act § 404 resentencings, and Amendment 821 and compassionate-release litigation — the collateral work that so often follows a hard-fought trial in a court like this one. She is the author of Reversing Your Criminal Conviction, and her recent recognitions include a 2026 Best Lawyers in America selection in Appellate Practice and a 2026 Chambers USA ranking in Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations.
The work itself spans the district’s full range: investigations and grand-jury representation, trial defense, sentencing, direct appeal, and collateral review. And because federal law is national, the same team handles matters for clients who live nowhere near Washington but whose cases were charged here — a common situation in this venue, where conduct anywhere in the country can be prosecuted if it touches federal institutions in the capital.
Frequently Asked Questions
What court handles federal criminal cases in Washington, D.C.?
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia, sitting at the E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Courthouse, 333 Constitution Avenue NW. Under 28 U.S.C. § 88 the District of Columbia is a single judicial district, so every federal criminal case in the capital is heard in that one courthouse.
Who prosecutes crimes in the District of Columbia?
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia — and uniquely, it prosecutes in two systems at once, charging federal crimes in the U.S. District Court and most local D.C. Code offenses in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Jeanine Pirro was confirmed by the Senate as U.S. Attorney on August 2, 2025.
What did Fischer v. United States decide?
In Fischer v. United States, 603 U.S. 480 (2024), the Supreme Court held that the obstruction statute 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2) covers only conduct that impairs the availability or integrity of evidence — documents, records, or objects — used in an official proceeding, not obstructive conduct generally. The case arose from this district, and the ruling required courts here to revisit charges built on the broader reading.
Why does the D.C. federal court try so many cases?
In fiscal year 2024, 19.4 percent of sentenced cases in this district followed a trial, against 2.8 percent nationally. The docket is dense with administration-of-justice, corruption, and politically sensitive prosecutions in which defendants contest guilt or principle rather than negotiate, and the court is institutionally accustomed to trying them.
Which appeals court covers the District of Columbia?
Federal convictions from this district are reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, located in the same courthouse; the criminal notice of appeal is due 14 days after entry of judgment. Convictions under the local D.C. Code follow a different path, to the D.C. Court of Appeals.
How does a federal criminal case proceed in the District of Columbia?
A federal case in D.C. follows the standard federal stages: investigation, indictment, initial appearance and arraignment, motions and discovery, plea or trial, and sentencing. What sets this district apart is that its cases more often involve grand-jury battles, privilege disputes, and classified-information procedures — and they go to trial far more often than the national norm.
Is the firm admitted to practice in the District of Columbia federal court?
Yes. Elizabeth Franklin-Best holds standing admission to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, one of seven federal district courts where she is admitted. That means the firm can appear immediately, without the sponsor and per-case motion this court requires of lawyers seeking pro hac vice admission.
What kinds of cases does this district see besides political ones?
Plenty. Recent dockets include the Bitfinex money-laundering case — a 60-month sentence for laundering billions in stolen bitcoin — major fraud and bribery prosecutions, Foreign Agents Registration Act trials, drug and firearms cases from the city, and national-security matters. The court’s reach is national because so much federal conduct connects to Washington.
How do we start on a District of Columbia federal matter?
With a paid, one-hour initial consultation. We map the posture — investigation, charge, trial, or post-judgment — identify the controlling deadlines, including the 14-day appeal window where it applies, and give you a direct assessment of the strategies that fit. We do not promise results; we explain what the law and the record actually support.
Can you file a § 2255 motion to challenge a District of Columbia conviction?
Yes. A federal prisoner challenging a District of Columbia conviction files a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion back in this district, generally within one year of finality. We handle these nationwide. One caution: this applies to federal convictions from this court — a local D.C. Code conviction is reviewed instead by the D.C. Court of Appeals.
Can you seek compassionate release from a District of Columbia federal sentence?
Yes. A federal prisoner may move for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). In the D.C. Circuit the standard is set by United States v. Wilson, 77 F.4th 837 (2023), which holds that a change in law by itself is not an extraordinary and compelling reason. We handle these motions nationwide.
Talk With Us About a Federal Case in the Nation’s Capital
Cases in this courthouse carry stakes that reach beyond the sentence — careers, clearances, reputations, institutions. If yours is among them, or if you are weighing an appeal or a § 2255 motion from a District of Columbia judgment, our paid, one-hour initial consultation is where the serious analysis begins.