NYC Federal Conspiracy Lawyer
The federal conspiracy statute, 18. U.S.C. 371 is the staple of federal prosecutors in most criminal cases that involve more than one defendant. In a very simple way, federal conspiracy is an agreement between several persons to commit any federal crime, sort of a partnership in criminal purposes.
The conspiracy charge is widely used in all sorts of federal prosecutions, from narcotics distribution crimes to white-collar fraud crimes. It is relatively easy for the government to prove that conspiracy took place because the statute does not require that the substantive crime was actually committed, only that there was an agreement to commit the crime. What’s more, the conspiracy charge will stand even if it was impossible for co-conspirators to commit the crime.
But the most dangerous and over-reaching feature of the federal conspiracy statute is that it punishes a person for the criminal actions of all members of the conspiracy, even if the defendant had no knowledge of them. By way of an example, a defendant agrees with a co-defendant to distribute 1 kilo of narcotics, being unaware that the co-defendant is part of a larger conspiracy to distribute 500 kilos. The defendant could be held liable for the actions of the entire group and be charged with conspiracy to distribute 500 kilos.
Effective Defenses Against Conspiracy Charges
There are several strong and potentially successful defenses to a conspiracy charge. One common and often effective strategy used by criminal defense attorneys in NYC is to challenge the existence of an agreement. Merely having knowledge of a crime, being associated with those involved, or simply being present is not enough to establish that a conspiracy existed. Simple knowledge or association, or even presence is not enough to prove that there was agreement.
-
Multiple Conspiracies – if the government alleges a single conspiracy it may be possible to argue that the evidence shows two or more conspiracies that result in a prejudicial variance between the indictment and the proof the government provided. In other words, if the indictment only has one conspiracy but the proof showed two or more, the defendant could be unfairly convicted of the crime he was not charged with.
-
Insufficient Evidence – the argument that evidence produced at trial is not sufficient enough to convince the jury that conspiracy actually occurred. In determining whether the evidence is sufficient, the court must view the facts and draw all reasonable inferences from them in the light most favorable to the government. This is not an easy argument to win but it could be done.
-
Withdrawal from the conspiracy – If the defendant withdrew from the criminal conspiracy, it can be a successful defense against the actual conspiracy charge as well as the substantive crimes which were the objects of the conspiracy (such as a scheme to defraud, mail and wire fraud, etc.) To show real withdrawal, the defendant must show more than the fact that he stopped acting as part of the conspiracy; an affirmative act is required, something that can be viewed as decisive and positive step to removing yourself from the conspiracy.
-
Statue of Limitations – in most federal criminal cases there is a five-year limitation period for most cases unless stated otherwise. Major frauds have a 7-year limitation period but many have a 10-year period, which includes most major financial crimes. Criminal tax charges limitation ranges from three to six years. The limitation period begins to run from when the crime is completed. In conspiracy cases, it begins to run from when the conspiracy ended.
-
Legal Impossibility – this defense applies where the defendant agreed with other to do something that is not a crime.
-
Lack of intent/mistake of fact – Not any conduct is criminal, and in order to prove that the defendant actually entered an agreement to commit a crime, the government must prove that the person has the same mental state as the underlying substantive crime.
How to Choose a NY Federal Criminal Lawyer
Defending against federal conspiracy charges requires a deep understanding of federal law and procedure, which differ significantly from state criminal practice. Many criminal attorneys rarely, if ever, handle federal cases and may lack the experience necessary to navigate federal courts effectively.
One of the most reliable ways to find the right criminal defense lawyer is to meet with them in person. Don’t rely solely on internet research. We recommend speaking directly with the attorney and asking about their background in federal defense, including their trial experience. Attorneys without courtroom experience are often more likely to encourage a plea deal, and may be less prepared to advocate aggressively on your behalf.
While not all cases go to trial, trial experience can make a significant difference in negotiating favorable plea agreements. Choosing a federal criminal lawyer is a serious decision—and one that deserves careful consideration.
If you or your loved ones face federal criminal charges in New York, you need a solid and competent representation, the kind you will get from federal lawyers at Norman Spencer Law Group. Some of our New York City criminal attorneys have been practicing federal criminal defense for over 30 years, handling thousands of cases and taking more than a hundred cases to jury trials. Our federal criminal attorneys have over 75 years of combined criminal defense experience and we are one phone call away.
When you need help, call our NYC criminal lawyers today at (212) 577-6677 to set up a confidential consultation.
