By the time charges are filed, the government has usually spent months or years building the case — wiretaps, controlled buys, pole cameras, phone records, cooperating witnesses, and an agent’s theory of who did what. Each of those layers was assembled by people, under pressure, and each of them can be wrong.
We do not wait for a plea offer. We read the affidavits that supported the warrants, test how the surveillance was authorized and conducted, examine how the informants were handled and what they were promised, and identify where the government’s theory depends on inference rather than evidence. That work produces suppression motions, it produces cross-examination, and often it produces a materially better resolution than the first offer on the table.
What we handle
- Federal trafficking, distribution, importation, and possession-with-intent prosecutions
- Multi-defendant and multi-district conspiracy indictments
- Continuing criminal enterprise and related charges
- Cases built on Title III wiretaps, pen registers, and cell-site data
- Firearm counts charged alongside drug offences
- Asset seizure and civil forfeiture arising from a drug investigation
- Texas state possession, delivery, and manufacturing charges
- Sentencing, including drug-quantity and role disputes, safety-valve eligibility, and mitigation
Where these cases are won
- The stop, the search, and the warrant. If the evidence came in unlawfully, everything downstream of it is in play. That is a documents-and-timeline exercise, and it is done early or not at all.
- The informant. Who is cooperating, what were they facing, what were they promised, and what is their history of telling this story? A cooperating witness who has been worked properly is the single most vulnerable part of most federal drug cases.
- Attribution. Conspiracy law sweeps broadly, and the government routinely attributes the whole enterprise to every defendant. Separating what a client actually did from what the indictment alleges the group did is often worth more at sentencing than at trial.
- Quantity. Drug quantity drives the Guidelines range. Quantities are frequently estimated, extrapolated, or taken from a cooperator’s recollection. They can be contested.
- Mitigation, built early. The record that persuades a judge at sentencing takes months to assemble. Starting it after a plea is starting it too late.