You should politely decline to speak with federal agents without an attorney present, regardless of whether they describe you as a witness, subject, or target. Even if agents suggest that refusing to speak makes you appear guilty or that cooperation would be better for you, the safest approach is to clearly state that you wish to consult with counsel before any interview. Statements to federal agents—even if you believe them to be innocuous or helpful—can lead to criminal charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 for false statements if agents interpret them differently than you intended. Contact experienced federal defense counsel immediately after any contact from federal agents.

A federal arraignment is your first appearance before a judge after indictment. During this proceeding, the court will: formally inform you of the charges; confirm you have received the indictment; ask for your plea (typically not guilty at this stage); address release or detention pending trial; and potentially set future court dates. While state court arraignments are often brief, federal arraignments can involve contested detention hearings where the government seeks to hold you without bail pending trial. Having counsel prepared to address detention issues is critical, as pretrial release can significantly impact your ability to participate in your defense and potentially influence ultimate case outcomes.

Federal sentencing guidelines calculate recommended sentencing ranges through a point-based system combining: (1) a base offense level for the specific crime; (2) specific offense characteristics that increase or decrease the offense level; (3) adjustments for factors like role in the offense, obstruction of justice, or acceptance of responsibility; and (4) criminal history category based on prior convictions. The resulting grid provides a recommended sentencing range in months. While no longer mandatory, judges must calculate and consider this range before considering other factors. Guidelines calculations are often the central battleground in federal cases, as seemingly technical arguments about enhancement applicability or loss calculations can impact recommended sentences by years or even decades.

Yes, though federal pretrial release is more difficult to obtain than in many state systems. The Bail Reform Act creates a presumption of detention for many federal offenses, particularly drug trafficking, firearms offenses, crimes of violence, and cases with potential sentences of ten years or more. To overcome this presumption, defendants must present evidence of stability, community ties, and lack of flight risk or danger. Unlike state courts, federal courts rarely use cash bonds, instead relying on release conditions such as electronic monitoring, travel restrictions, and reporting requirements. Early and effective representation at detention hearings is crucial, as pretrial detention significantly impacts defense preparation and can indirectly influence plea negotiations and trial outcomes.

A proffer session (or "queen for a day" meeting) is a meeting between a defendant, defense counsel, and federal prosecutors where the defendant provides information about criminal activity with limited immunity. These sessions typically operate under proffer letters preventing direct use of statements against the defendant, though derivative use and impeachment exceptions create significant risks. Proffer sessions serve as preliminary steps toward potential cooperation agreements and substantial assistance departures, but require careful preparation and risk assessment. The decision to proffer involves weighing potential sentencing benefits against disclosure risks, potential impacts on trial defenses, and personal safety concerns. This complex strategic decision requires thorough discussion with experienced federal defense counsel familiar with local prosecutors' practices regarding cooperation.

Federal criminal cases generally take substantially longer than state cases—typically 6-18 months from indictment to resolution, though complex cases may extend 2-3 years or more. Several factors contribute to this timeline: complex discovery involving extensive documentation, electronic evidence, and wiretap recordings; pretrial motions practice addressing sophisticated legal issues; coordination among multiple defendants; and scheduling constraints in busy federal courts. While the Speedy Trial Act theoretically requires trial within 70 days of indictment or initial appearance, various exclusions for motions, evidence review, and complexity routinely extend this timeline. Defendants should prepare for a lengthy process requiring sustained financial and emotional resources.

Federal conspiracy charges allege agreements between two or more people to commit federal crimes, regardless of whether the underlying crime was completed or even attempted. Conspiracy charges are powerful prosecutorial tools because they: require only minimal overt acts in furtherance of the agreement; allow prosecutors to hold each conspirator responsible for all reasonably foreseeable acts of co-conspirators; permit introduction of co-conspirator statements that would otherwise be inadmissible hearsay; and typically carry the same penalties as the underlying substantive offense. Conspiracy charges appear in approximately 80% of federal drug cases and are common in white collar prosecutions, allowing prosecutors to target entire alleged criminal organizations through a single charge.

Unlike many state systems, there is no comprehensive federal expungement statute allowing routine clearing of federal convictions. Federal courts have extremely limited expungement authority, typically exercised only in extraordinary circumstances involving proven illegal government conduct. A narrow exception exists for first-time, non-violent drug possession offenders under 21 years old who complete probation under the Federal First Offender Act. Given these limitations, the most effective approach is preventing conviction through successful defense or negotiating alternatives like pretrial diversion in appropriate cases. For those with federal convictions seeking relief, presidential pardons represent the primary (though rarely granted) option for addressing collateral consequences.