Federal Criminal Defense FAQ

A crime becomes a federal offense when it violates a statute enacted by Congress rather than a state criminal code. Federal jurisdiction often rests on a connection to interstate commerce, the use of the mail or wires, conduct on federal property, harm to a federal program or agency, or activity that crosses state or national borders. Federal crimes are investigated by agencies such as the FBI, DEA, IRS Criminal Investigation, and Homeland Security Investigations, and the U.S. Department of Justice prosecutes them through the United States Attorney’s Office for the district where the case is brought.

Federal cases are prosecuted by experienced Assistant U.S. Attorneys, investigated by federal agencies with significant resources, and sentenced under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Federal investigations are frequently long and document-intensive, and they often become known to a person only when charges are near. Federal courts also follow their own rules of procedure and evidence. Because the system, the sentencing exposure, and the practice norms differ so much from state courts, federal cases call for counsel who concentrate on federal defense.

A target letter is a written notice from a U.S. Attorney’s Office telling you that you are a target of a federal grand jury investigation, meaning prosecutors believe substantial evidence links you to a crime. It is a serious signal, but it is not a charge, and the period before an indictment is often the most important time to act. If you receive one, the key steps are to preserve all records, avoid discussing the matter with anyone other than a lawyer, and contact federal defense counsel promptly.

Federal prosecutors sort the people connected to a grand jury investigation into three categories. A witness is thought to have useful information but is not suspected of wrongdoing. A subject is a person whose conduct falls within the scope of the investigation, a middle status that can shift in either direction as the evidence develops. A target is someone the government believes substantial evidence connects to a crime, which makes an indictment a realistic possibility. The label shapes strategy, including whether to testify, invoke the Fifth Amendment, or open a dialogue with the government, and defense counsel can often confirm your status with prosecutors before you make any of those decisions.

For most non-capital federal offenses, the government generally must bring charges within five years of the alleged crime under 18 U.S.C. Section 3282. Some categories carry longer periods. Certain offenses affecting financial institutions, and some terrorism and child-exploitation offenses, have extended or, in limited cases, unlimited limitations periods. Because the rules vary by statute and conduct, the limitations question in any particular case should be reviewed carefully by counsel.

A conviction for a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, which covers most felonies, makes it a federal offense under 18 U.S.C. Section 922(g)(1) to possess a firearm or ammunition. In Rehaif v. United States, the Supreme Court held that the government must prove the person knew of the status that barred them from possessing a firearm. The constitutionality of the felon-in-possession ban is being actively litigated in the lower courts after the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment decisions, and the law is unsettled and varies by circuit, so anyone facing a firearm charge or worried about firearm rights after a conviction should get current, case-specific advice. Restoration of firearm rights through federal channels is very limited.

Under the Fifth Amendment, a person generally cannot be tried for a serious federal crime unless a grand jury has returned an indictment. A federal grand jury is a group of citizens that hears evidence presented by prosecutors and decides whether there is probable cause to charge. An indictment is a formal accusation. It is not evidence of guilt, and it does not lower the government’s burden, which remains proof beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. Grand jury proceedings are secret, and the defense is not present.

After an arrest, a federal magistrate judge decides whether you will be released or detained pending trial under the Bail Reform Act. The court weighs whether any conditions can reasonably assure your appearance and the safety of the community. Release on conditions is common in many cases, but certain charges trigger a presumption of detention. A well-prepared detention hearing, with a release plan, third-party custodians, and supporting evidence, can make a decisive difference.

No. In fiscal year 2025, roughly 98 percent of sentenced federal defendants pleaded guilty rather than going to trial, according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. That does not mean a plea is automatic or that a trial is off the table. It means much of the real work of federal defense happens before any trial: scrutinizing the investigation, challenging the evidence through pretrial motions, and negotiating from a position of strength. Whether to go to trial is always the client’s decision, made with full advice about the risks and the realistic alternatives.

You are not required to speak with federal agents, and what you say can be used against you. A proffer is a meeting in which a person gives information to prosecutors, usually under a limited written agreement. Proffers can be valuable, but they carry real risk and should never happen without counsel and careful preparation. Before any contact with agents or prosecutors, the safest course is to speak with a lawyer first.

A federal sentence is built in steps. The court first calculates an advisory range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, based on the offense level and the defendant’s criminal history. The court then considers the broader sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. Section 3553(a), including the nature of the offense, the history and characteristics of the defendant, and the need for the sentence imposed. The judge must impose a sentence that is sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to serve the purposes of sentencing. Effective mitigation can move a sentence well below the Guidelines range.

No. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory rather than mandatory. A judge must still correctly calculate and consider the Guidelines range, but is not bound by it and may impose a sentence above or below that range after weighing the Section 3553(a) factors. This advisory framework is what makes detailed, individualized sentencing advocacy so important.

Several amendments have reshaped the Guidelines since 2023. Amendment 821 limited criminal-history status points and created a two-level reduction for zero-point offenders, meaning defendants with no criminal history points, and the Sentencing Commission made those changes retroactive, so some people already serving time can seek reductions under 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c)(2). Amendment 826, effective November 1, 2024, bars acquitted conduct from the Guidelines calculation. Amendment 827 wrote the intended-loss rule into the text of the fraud guideline. The Commission’s 2025 simplification package then removed the separate departure step from the sentencing process effective November 1, 2025. Whether any of these changes helps in a particular case turns on the record, so eligibility deserves prompt review.

A mandatory minimum is a sentence floor set by statute, for example, in many drug trafficking and certain firearm offenses, that a judge generally cannot go below, even when the advisory Guidelines suggest less. There are limited exceptions. The statutory safety valve can allow relief for certain defendants with minimal criminal histories, and a government motion for substantial assistance can permit a sentence below the minimum. Whether a mandatory minimum applies and whether any exception is available is a critical early question in many cases.

Federal parole was abolished for offenses committed after November 1, 1987. Today, a federal sentence is generally served in full, reduced chiefly by good conduct time of up to fifty-four days per year. Most sentences are also followed by a term of supervised release, which is served in the community under conditions set by the court. Programs such as compassionate release and certain First Step Act provisions can, in defined circumstances, shorten time in custody, but there is no general parole.

The First Step Act of 2018 lets many federal prisoners earn ten days of time credits, and in some cases fifteen, for every thirty days of successful participation in approved recidivism-reduction programs and productive activities. Credits can speed transfer to prerelease custody, such as a halfway house or home confinement, and up to twelve months of credits can be applied toward an earlier start of supervised release. Eligibility depends on the offense of conviction, because Congress excluded a long list of offenses, and on the recidivism-risk level the Bureau of Prisons assigns, so credit calculations are worth checking carefully. These credits operate on top of the separate good conduct credit most federal prisoners earn.

In many federal cases, yes. Restitution to victims is mandatory for crimes of violence, most property and fraud offenses, and certain other crimes under 18 U.S.C. Section 3663A, and it is discretionary in a broader set of cases. The amount is meant to compensate victims for their actual losses, and the court generally must order restitution regardless of the defendant’s ability to pay, though ability to pay affects the payment schedule. A restitution order is enforced like a civil judgment and can become a lien on the defendant’s property that lasts twenty years under 18 U.S.C. Section 3613, so it can follow a person long after release. Careful work on loss calculation and the payment schedule is an important part of sentencing.

It depends on the complexity of the case. The Speedy Trial Act generally requires an indictment within 30 days of arrest and trial within 70 days of indictment or first appearance, but many periods of delay are excluded, and most cases take far longer than those minimums. A straightforward case may run six months to a year from charge to sentencing, while complex white-collar, fraud, or multi-defendant cases routinely take two to five years or more. Sentencing itself usually occurs about two to three months after a guilty plea or verdict, to allow time for the presentence report. We use that time to investigate, litigate, and prepare mitigation rather than simply wait.

Yes. After a conviction, you generally have the right to a direct appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for your circuit. An appeal is not a retrial. It is a review of the trial record for legal errors that may have affected the verdict or the sentence. Common issues include evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, and Guidelines calculations. Appellate work is central to our practice: our principal attorney has handled over 100 federal appeals in the courts of appeals nationwide.

In a federal criminal case, the notice of appeal must generally be filed within fourteen days after the entry of the judgment under the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. This deadline is short and strict, so the decision whether to appeal should be made quickly. If the deadline is at risk or has recently passed, it is important to consult counsel immediately, because limited mechanisms may exist to address a missed deadline in narrow circumstances.

A motion under 28 U.S.C. Section 2255 is the primary way a person in federal custody challenges a conviction or sentence after the direct appeal is over. It is filed in the sentencing court and raises issues that generally could not be raised on direct appeal, most often ineffective assistance of counsel, newly discovered evidence, or a constitutional violation. A Section 2255 motion is usually subject to a one-year filing deadline, so timing matters.

Compassionate release is a mechanism under 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c)(1)(A) that allows a federal court to reduce a sentence when extraordinary and compelling reasons justify it and the sentencing factors support a reduction. Common grounds include serious medical conditions, advanced age combined with declining health, and certain family circumstances. A defendant may file the motion directly with the court after asking the Bureau of Prisons and meeting the statute’s exhaustion requirement. In May 2026, the Supreme Court narrowed the doctrine in two decisions: Rutherford v. United States held that a sentencing disparity from a nonretroactive change in law is not, by itself, an extraordinary and compelling reason, and Fernandez v. United States held that the claimed invalidity of a conviction belongs in a Section 2255 motion rather than a compassionate-release motion. Grants remain selective: the Sentencing Commission reported that federal courts granted about 14 percent of compassionate-release motions in fiscal year 2025, so a well-documented motion matters.

We defend people at every stage of a federal case, from the investigation and grand jury phase, through pretrial litigation, trial, and sentencing, and on into direct appeals and post-conviction relief. Our practice has particular depth in federal appeals, sentencing advocacy, and post-conviction work, including Section 2255 motions and compassionate release. Our principal attorney, Elizabeth Franklin-Best, has appeared in more than 330 federal proceedings across all twelve circuits, with reported decisions that include United States v. Slager in the Fourth Circuit and the post-conviction habeas case King v. Riley. We handle white-collar and fraud matters, public corruption, drug and firearm offenses, and a broad range of other federal charges.

Yes. Elizabeth Franklin-Best is licensed in South Carolina and New York. She is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, all twelve federal courts of appeals, and several federal district courts. She appears in federal district courts nationwide through admission pro hac vice. Because federal criminal law is national law, we can take on federal trial, appellate, and post-conviction matters across the country.

An initial consultation with our firm is paid and runs one full hour with an attorney. We use that hour to work through the specifics: where the matter stands, what the government appears to be pursuing, and which defenses or remedies fit your facts. Structuring it this way lets us give candid, case-specific guidance rather than generic reassurance. Booking is available directly through our scheduling page.

As early as possible. The strongest opportunities in a federal case often come before charges are filed, when records can be preserved, witnesses identified, and the defense can engage with prosecutors. If you have received a target letter or grand jury subpoena, learned that you are under investigation, been contacted by federal agents, or already been charged, that is the time to call. Seeking counsel early does not signal guilt. It protects your rights when it matters most.

Fees vary with the stage and complexity of the case, the charges, the volume of discovery, and whether the matter resolves before trial or goes to trial or appeal. Federal defense is typically billed through a fixed fee or a retainer rather than an hourly walk-in rate, and a focused pre-indictment representation costs far less than a multi-week trial or a full appeal. Rather than quote a number that cannot fit your facts, we use the paid, one-hour initial consultation to understand the matter and then propose a clear fee structure for the specific work involved. Our aim is transparency, so you know what you are paying for and why.