When federal agents or a grand jury turn their attention to someone in Oregon, the case belongs to the United States District Court for the District of Oregon — a single court covering the entire state, with its own judges, its own local rules, and sentencing stakes far removed from anything in Oregon state court. Understanding how this district actually operates is the starting point of any sound defense.
This page looks at the District of Oregon from the defense side: the courthouses and the bench, the prosecutors, what the district’s docket and sentencing statistics actually show, and how we defend cases here. Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C. practices federal criminal defense, appeals, and post-conviction litigation nationwide, and Elizabeth Franklin-Best represents federal defendants in the District of Oregon through admission pro hac vice, appearing alongside Oregon local counsel. This page sits within our federal courts directory.
If you have received a target letter, learned you are under federal investigation, or already face charges in Portland, Eugene, Medford, or Pendleton, we offer a paid, one-hour initial consultation to evaluate the case and chart the immediate next steps.
Table of Contents
Quick Answer: District of Oregon
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What court handles federal cases in Oregon? | The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon — one district for the whole state, staffed in Portland, Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton. |
| How big is the bench? | Six district judgeships under 28 U.S.C. § 133; Chief Judge Michael McShane leads the court as of mid-2026. |
| Who prosecutes federal cases there? | The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Oregon, headed as of mid-2026 by U.S. Attorney Scott Bradford. |
| What stands out about the docket? | Drug trafficking accounted for 56% of FY2024 sentencings, and fentanyl drove 41% of the district’s drug cases — roughly double the national share. |
| Which circuit hears appeals? | The Ninth Circuit reviews District of Oregon convictions; a Section 2255 motion returns to this district, before the sentencing court. |
| Can the firm appear in the District of Oregon? | Yes — we appear pro hac vice under Local Rule 83-3, associating Oregon local counsel as that rule requires, and we begin with a paid, one-hour initial consultation. |
Key Takeaways
- Oregon forms a single federal judicial district under 28 U.S.C. § 117, with staffed courthouses in Portland, Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton.
- Congress allots the district six district judgeships; Chief Judge Michael McShane leads the bench as of mid-2026, with senior and magistrate judges at every courthouse.
- Of the 521 people sentenced in the district in fiscal year 2024, 56% were drug-trafficking defendants — and fentanyl was the primary drug in 41% of the drug cases.
- Oregon federal judges stayed within the Guidelines range in just 16.1% of FY2024 sentencings, one of the lowest within-range rates in the nation.
- Substantial-assistance departures under §5K1.1 reached 27.3% of cases here — nearly triple the national rate.
- An appeal goes to the Ninth Circuit, and the criminal notice of appeal is generally due 14 days after entry of judgment under Rule 4(b).
- Motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 come back to the District of Oregon, the court of conviction.
- We handle District of Oregon trial-level, appellate, and post-conviction matters pro hac vice, working alongside Oregon local counsel.
The District of Oregon at a Glance
Under 28 U.S.C. § 117, “Oregon constitutes one judicial district.” The statute names six places of holding court — Coquille, Eugene or Springfield, Klamath Falls, Medford, Pendleton, and Portland — but the court’s staffed courthouses, per the district’s own website, are four: Portland, Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton. Portland carries the heaviest share of the criminal calendar, while the Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton courthouses keep the court close to the Willamette Valley, southern Oregon, and the eastern counties.
Congress allots the district six district judgeships under 28 U.S.C. § 133. As of mid-2026, Chief Judge Michael McShane leads the court, joined by the district’s other active district judges, a corps of senior district judges who continue to carry substantial caseloads, and magistrate judges stationed at each of the four staffed courthouses — so initial appearances, detention hearings, and preliminary matters can be handled locally whether a case arises in Multnomah County or Umatilla County. The court sits within the Ninth Circuit, which reviews its judgments on appeal.
The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure govern every case in the district, but the District of Oregon layers its own local rules on top — including Local Rule 83-3, which controls how out-of-state counsel are admitted for a particular case. Counsel who know both sets of rules avoid the procedural missteps that can cost a defendant leverage before the merits are ever reached.
Federal Criminal Cases in the District
The District of Oregon’s criminal calendar runs from white-collar offenses and fraud to drug and firearms prosecutions, with the drug docket dominating by sheer volume. Whatever the charge, a federal case here follows a structured path with decision points at every turn.
An investigation by the FBI, DEA, HSI, or IRS usually comes first — sometimes announced by a target letter or grand jury subpoena, sometimes not announced at all. Charges follow, ordinarily by indictment, and the defendant makes an initial appearance and arraignment before a magistrate judge. Discovery and pretrial motions follow; the case then resolves through a plea agreement or a trial, and a conviction moves to sentencing under the Guidelines framework. Our federal criminal process hub explains each of these stages.
We defend clients at every one of those stages in the District of Oregon — testing the government’s evidence, litigating suppression and other pretrial motions, negotiating when resolution genuinely serves the client, and trying the case when it does not.
Applied Insight: In a district where 98.5% of FY2024 cases ended in guilty pleas, the real contest is usually fought before any plea is entered — in charging decisions, suppression litigation, and Guidelines positioning. Engaging counsel during the investigation, rather than after indictment, preserves the widest set of options.
Inside the District’s Criminal Docket
The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s FY2024 statistical packet for the district reports 521 individuals sentenced. Drug trafficking supplied 292 of those cases — 56.0% of the docket, nearly double the 29.5% national figure. Firearms offenses followed at 11.7%, fraud, theft, and embezzlement at 7.7%, and robbery at 4.2%. Immigration prosecutions, which account for 30% of the federal caseload nationally, were just 2.5% here — a reminder that every district’s enforcement profile is its own.
The drug numbers tell a fentanyl story. Fentanyl was the primary substance in 41.0% of the district’s FY2024 federal drug cases — roughly twice its 22.0% national share — with methamphetamine accounting for another 48.1%. Congress reinforced that enforcement push when the HALT Fentanyl Act, signed in July 2025, permanently placed fentanyl-related substances on Schedule I, cementing trafficking penalties for fentanyl analogues. In a Portland or Medford fentanyl case, mandatory minimums and drug-quantity calculations are where the defense fight begins.
White-collar matters run as a smaller but steady current: the district’s fraud docket produced 40 sentencings in FY2024, and the office continues to charge investment-fraud and tax cases alongside its drug and firearms work.
Sentencing in the District of Oregon
The District of Oregon is one of the least Guidelines-bound courts in the country. In FY2024, its judges imposed within-range sentences in only 16.1% of cases — against a 45.7% national average — while 54.3% of sentences were below-range variances. Government-sponsored substantial-assistance departures under §5K1.1 ran at 27.3%, close to triple the 9.9% national rate, and upward departures were rare.
That pattern matters for strategy. Since United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), the Guidelines have been advisory, and Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), confirmed that district judges may vary from them based on the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). A bench that goes below the range in more than half of its cases is a bench that listens to mitigation — so a rigorous sentencing presentation is not a formality in this district; it is where months and years are won.
The U.S. Attorney’s Office and Notable Prosecutions
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Oregon prosecutes federal crimes statewide. As of mid-2026, Scott Bradford serves as U.S. Attorney; the district court appointed him under 28 U.S.C. § 546(d) effective November 25, 2025, so he holds the office by court appointment rather than by presidential nomination and Senate confirmation. The office’s recent charging activity runs heavily to fentanyl and methamphetamine trafficking, child-exploitation offenses, and fraud — including a June 2026 investment-fraud guilty plea out of Baker City.
The district’s signature white-collar matter of recent years was the Aequitas prosecution. A federal jury in the District of Oregon convicted the former CEO and senior executives of the Lake Oswego-based Aequitas firms, and in September 2023 they were sentenced to federal prison for what the Justice Department described as a $300 million fraud conspiracy — among the largest investment-fraud prosecutions in Oregon history.
Fraud cases of that scale now operate under tighter Supreme Court limits. Kousisis v. United States, 605 U.S. 114 (2025), upheld fraudulent-inducement theories under the federal fraud statutes while stressing that materiality is the gatekeeper — a requirement we press in investment-fraud and contracting cases, because a misstatement that would not have moved a reasonable counterparty is not federal fraud.
Appeals and Post-Conviction Matters
Sentencing is not necessarily the end. Convictions and sentences from this district go up to the Ninth Circuit, and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(b) allows a defendant only 14 days from entry of judgment to file the notice of appeal. The Supreme Court has underscored how consequential that single filing is: under Garza v. Idaho, 586 U.S. 232 (2019), a lawyer who fails to file a requested notice of appeal performs deficiently even when the plea agreement contained an appeal waiver.
Collateral attacks come back to this courthouse: a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging a District of Oregon conviction is filed in the district itself, before the court that imposed sentence. Our federal post-conviction relief practice litigates those motions, and we pursue compassionate release in this district as well — a setting worth noting, because Ninth Circuit courts granted 31.0% of compassionate-release motions in FY2025, the highest rate of any circuit against a 14.1% national average, per the Sentencing Commission. Appellate and post-conviction litigation is the core of our practice, and because it is governed by national law, it travels to Oregon without friction.
How the Firm Practices in This Court
We appear in the District of Oregon through pro hac vice admission — the case-specific admission federal courts extend to qualified out-of-district counsel. In this district the procedure lives in Local Rule 83-3: an applicant under LR 83-3(a)(1) associates with Oregon local counsel unless the court grants a waiver, so our Oregon engagements pair an Oregon-barred lawyer with our team from the first filing.
Nothing about that arrangement is unusual. The same Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the same Sentencing Guidelines, and the same federal statutes govern in Portland as in every other federal courthouse, and seasoned federal practitioners cross district lines constantly. What varies from district to district is local practice — which is precisely what the local-counsel pairing is designed to cover.
The question that should drive the choice of counsel is depth in federal work itself. Elizabeth Franklin-Best represents federal defendants in the District of Oregon through admission pro hac vice, and her experience is deep and national: she has handled more than 330 federal proceedings, including over 100 appeals, and has appeared in all twelve federal circuits and before the United States Supreme Court, admitted to each. Chambers USA 2026 ranks her for Litigation: White-Collar Crime & Government Investigations, and The Best Lawyers in America 2026 names her a “Best Lawyer” in Appellate Practice. That practice concentrates on precisely the trial-level defense, appellate, and post-conviction litigation a District of Oregon case demands.
Frequently Asked Questions
What court handles federal criminal cases in Oregon?
All of Oregon falls within one federal district, the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. The court is staffed in Portland, Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton; the governing statute, 28 U.S.C. § 117, also names Coquille and Klamath Falls as places where court may be held.
Who prosecutes federal crimes in the District of Oregon?
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Oregon brings every federal prosecution in the state. As of mid-2026 the office is headed by U.S. Attorney Scott Bradford, and its recent caseload leans heavily toward fentanyl and methamphetamine trafficking, child-exploitation offenses, and fraud.
Which appeals court covers the District of Oregon?
Appeals from this district go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the largest federal circuit. The notice of appeal in a criminal case is generally due within 14 days after judgment is entered, so the appellate clock starts almost immediately after sentencing.
How does a federal criminal case proceed in the District of Oregon?
Cases typically open with an investigation, then an indictment, an initial appearance and arraignment before a magistrate judge, discovery and pretrial motions, and resolution by plea or trial followed by sentencing. In fiscal year 2024, 98.5% of the district’s cases resolved by guilty plea, which makes the pre-plea stages the real battleground.
Can an out-of-state lawyer represent me in the District of Oregon?
Yes. Local Rule 83-3 lets a qualified out-of-state attorney appear pro hac vice in a specific case, ordinarily in association with Oregon local counsel. Federal criminal law is the same nationwide, so experienced federal defenders routinely practice here this way.
Does the firm handle federal cases in the District of Oregon?
We do. Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C. defends District of Oregon clients at the trial level, on appeal to the Ninth Circuit, and in post-conviction proceedings, appearing pro hac vice with Oregon local counsel and beginning every engagement with a paid, one-hour initial consultation.
What federal crimes are most common in Oregon?
Drug trafficking dominates: it accounted for 56% of the district’s 521 sentencings in fiscal year 2024, with fentanyl as the primary drug in 41% of drug cases and methamphetamine in 48%. Firearms offenses, fraud, and robbery made up most of the remainder.
How often do Oregon federal judges sentence below the Guidelines?
More often than almost anywhere else. In fiscal year 2024 only 16.1% of the district’s sentences fell within the Guidelines range, while 54.3% were downward variances and 27.3% followed substantial-assistance motions. Thorough mitigation work has real traction before this bench.
How many federal judges serve in the District of Oregon?
Congress allots the district six district judgeships under 28 U.S.C. § 133. As of mid-2026 Chief Judge Michael McShane leads the court, and senior district judges and magistrate judges — stationed in Portland, Eugene, Medford, and Pendleton — round out the bench.
Talk With a Federal Defense Lawyer About Your Oregon Case
Whether the matter is a fentanyl indictment in Portland, a fraud investigation in Eugene, an appeal to the Ninth Circuit, or a Section 2255 motion returning to this district, the right time to involve counsel is now. We offer a paid, one-hour initial consultation to assess where the case stands and what can still be shaped.