Synthetic child sexual abuse material (CSAM) may not involve a camera or physical contact but it will depicts a child in a sexual context and thus is subject to regulation. Artificial intelligence is used to create realistic images or videos of children in sexual situations. Sometimes, these materials depict completely fabricated children or the face or likeness of a real child, placing them into sexualized content without their knowledge or consent. When it is the face or likeness of a real child, there is a higher likelihood of charges being imminent.

Can I be Charged with Synthetic CSAM?

It is possible to be charged criminally when in possession of AI generated child sex abuse material. There has been some movement in this area to litigate the legality of charging such activity criminally and only time will tell what that means for how the Supreme Court will rule as recent cases move through the system. News continues to state that AI – Generated CSAM is on the rise and “a growing concern” which will in turn result in additional federal and state criminal charges for AI-Generated CSAM.

Regulation of AI-created intimate images, often referred to as “deep fakes” has been broadly adopted by most states and the federal government. In the state of Georgia, there have been several attempts to change legislation including this recent letter written by Jon Ossoff. There are also recent prosecutions including a man in KY who was sentenced to five years for using AI to create child sexual abuse material. Prosecutions at the federal level for CSAM is on the rise as well.

If you learn that you are under investigation for offenses related to CSAM, you should contact us immediately. We are here to help and have experience to fight these cases.

STEPS IN THE FEDERAL CRIMINAL PROCESS (Note: this blog will discuss the procedure for a plea. For more information on what to expect at federal criminal trial, read more here.)

Initial Appearance

Generally, after an investigation, charges are brought via a federal criminal indictment. Hiring a federal criminal defense attorney as soon as possible results in a better resolution.

Once an indictment is filed, and you are arrested and processed, you are brought before a magistrate judge for an initial hearing on the case. At that time, you learn more about your rights and the charges against you, and the judge decides whether to grant you pretrial release or order you be detained.

Arraignment

This hearing can occur at the same time as the initial appearance. You are asked if you have read and understood the charges against you and you formally enter a plea of “Not Guilty”.

Discovery

Federal criminal discovery is governed by three sources of law: Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the Supreme Court cases of Brady and Giglio, and the Jencks Act.

Plea Negotiations

The plea bargain itself, called a “Rule 11” plea in the Federal Criminal Justice system, generally is memorialized in a 15-20 page document called the “plea agreement“.

Change of Plea Hearing

A change of plea hearing in federal court is scheduled when a defendant decides to plead guilty to a federal offense. During the hearing, the judge will ask questions to ensure that the plea is entered freely and voluntarily.

Preparation of Pre-Sentence Report

After you enter a plea of guilty to a federal offense or is convicted by trial, you will meet with a probation officer. The probation officer will conduct an interview you to get more information about the entire case and then submits a report for the judge to determine the proper sentence. The following information is gathered during this interview and pre sentence investigation: family history, community ties, education background, employment history, military history, physical health, mental and emotional health, history of substance abuse, financial condition, and willingness to accept responsibility for the offense. Learn more about the pre-sentence report and the pre-sentence report interview.

United States Sentencing Guidelines

The United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines are what the judge uses to decide an appropriate sentence for each case.

Sentencing Hearing

A federal sentencing hearing is when final arguments are presented and a judge hands down the sentence.

I. What charges can the government use to allege money laundering?

18 U.S.C. § 1956: This is for laundering monetary instruments and carries a penalty of up to 20 years in prison and fines of up to $500,000 or twice the value of the funds involved, whichever is greater

18 U.S.C. § 1957: This applies to engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity and can result in up to 10 years in prison and fines up to twice the value of the property involved.

18 U.S.C. § 1956(h): criminalizes conspiracy to commit money laundering. It makes it illegal for two or more people to agree to conduct or attempt to conduct a financial transaction involving the proceeds of specified unlawful activity (money laundering). The crime is the agreement itself, regardless of whether the money laundering was ultimately successful.

Bulk cash smuggling (31 U.S.C. § 5332): knowingly concealing more than $10,000 in currency or other monetary instruments on the person of such individual or in any conveyance, article of luggage, merchandise, or other container, and transports or transfers or attempts to transport or transfer such currency or monetary instruments from a place within the United States to a place outside of the United States, or from a place outside the United States to a place within the United States

RICO Act- the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)

II. Drug traffickers are purported to utilize some of the following tactics to money launder

-Purchase and or title assets in fictitious names, aliases, or in the names of friends or relatives

-Create and maintain Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency accounts. These are utilized because of the anonymity associated with the use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency accounts and because cryptocurrency is decentralized.

III. Dark Net Explanation

The darknet is a part of the internet that requires special software, like the Tor browser, to access, and is not indexed by standard search engines. It uses layered encryption to make user activity anonymous

IV. Cryptocurrency

This is a type of virtual currency, that is a decentralized, peer to peer network based medium of value or exchange that may be used as a substitute for fiat to buy goods or services or exchanged for fiat currency or other cryptocurrencies. Examples of cryptocurrency are Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Monero, among others.

Most cryptocurrencies have a blockchain which is a distributed public ledger, run by the decentralized network, containing an immutable and historical record of every transaction. It is still difficult for a number of reasons for law enforcement to track.

Cryptocurrency is stored in a virtual account called a wallet. Crypto wallets are designed to store your private key, keeping your crypto accessible at all times. They also allow you to send, receive, and spend cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum. Crypto wallets keep your private keys – the passwords that give you access to your cryptocurrencies – protected and accessible, allowing you to send and receive cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) has issued many notices discussing the various issues with cryptocurrency including recent concerns over regulatory risks related to convertible virtual currency kiosks. This notice dates back to 2019! It’s worth a read as it describes dark net marketplaces and cryptocurrency really well.

V. Recent cases in the news

The recent “Fire bunny” case was a case that operated on the darknet from January 2019 to August 2022. It operated on multiple dark web marketplaces and described itself as an “old vendor with the best in QUALITY SPEED OF DELIVERY and STEALTH.” In total, the defendants allegedly received nearly $8 million in Bitcoin proceeds and investigators found nearly $900,00 worth of cryptocurrency on one of the defendant’s phone. Some of the money received was laundered by converting Monero – a form of anonymized cryptocurrency that is extremely difficult to trace or monitor – into Bitcoin. The Bitcoin would then enter cryptocurrency exchange accounts controlled by the defendants and others. At least $2.4 million in Bitcoin was sent to a foreign based cryptocurrency exchange and laundered in the form of Chinese Yuan.

Samourai CEO Keonne Rodriguez and Samourai CTO William Lonergan Hill were recently sentenced for knowingly transmitting over $237 million in alleged criminal proceeds, coming from, among other things, drug trafficking, darknet marketplaces, cyber-intrusions, frauds, sanctioned jurisdictions, murder-for-hire schemes, and a child pornography (“CSAM”) website.

It utilized a Bitcoin mixing service known as “Whirlpool,” and coordinated batches of Bitcoin exchanges between groups of Samourai users. Through this process, the original source of particular Bitcoin holdings became obscured within the blockchain’s transactional record, effectively preventing law enforcement agencies and cryptocurrency exchanges from tracing funds back to their origins.

The second service, called “Ricochet,” enabled users to introduce additional and unnecessary intermediate transactions—known as “hops”—between sending and receiving addresses. This feature served a similar obfuscation purpose, making it substantially more difficult for monitoring entities to establish connections between cryptocurrency transfers and potential illicit activities. The scale of these operations was considerable: from Ricochet’s launch in 2017 and Whirlpool’s inception in 2019, more than 80,000 Bitcoin—valued at over $2 billion at the time—passed through these services. Samourai collected fees for both services, estimated to have a total value of more than $6 million.

Finally, in Operation RapTor, participating law enforcement agencies in the U.S., Europe, South America, and Asia arrested 270 darknet vendors, buyers, and administrators. Recently, as part of that large takedown, in the Southern District of New York (which is a district we are licensed to practice in) Incognito Market owner Rui-Siang Lin pled guilty for operating an online narcotics bazaar that existed on the dark web. It is alleged that Incognito Market sold more than $100 million of narcotics to anyone using the Tor web browser on the “dark web” or “darknet.”

Conaway & Strickler, PC is licensed to practice in NY, GA and CA. We can “pro hac” into any federal district in the country and have represented clients in New Hampshire, Vermont, Georgia, New Jersey, New York, California, Iowa, Texas, Tennessee, Florida, Pennsylvania, among others. We have “first chaired” many jury trials and have represented clients charged with RICO, drug trafficking and cryptocurrency money laundering cases. Please contact us for additional information or if you have a case you want to discuss with us. Please see here for additional blogs on this subject.

DME Fraud

Durable Medical Equipment (DME) fraud remains a cornerstone of federal enforcement as seen in the recent takedown. An indictment in the Western District of New York charges a medical doctor with billing roughly $29.6 million for fictious DME and $5.6 million for audio-only telehealth visits, which were brief or never occurred. That doctor produced and maintained false and fictitious medical records and fraudulently certified orders for braces without regard to medical necessity. The doctor now faces federal criminal charges of conspiracy to commit health care fraud, health care fraud, and false statements relating to health care matters.

In “Operation Gold Rush,” prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York indicted 11 defendants, including two pharmacists, members of a transnational criminal organization based in Russia and Eastern Europe. These individuals allegedly orchestrated a massive Medicare fraud and money-laundering scheme that billed over $10.6 billion to federal health programs—making it the largest case by loss amount ever charged by the DOJ. The group used foreign straw owners to acquire dozens of U.S.-based DME suppliers, then submitted fraudulent claims for equipment such as urinary catheters and glucose monitors that never delivered, exploiting stolen identities and confidential patient data. To date, 19 defendants have been charged in the case, including multiple arrests abroad (Estonia) and at U.S. entry points.

COVID-19 Testing Kickbacks

COVID-19 testing kickback schemes typically involve health care providers or marketers billing Medicare for over-the-counter or lab-based COVID-19 tests that were unnecessary, never provided, or obtained through illicit referrals. These cases often rely on the same core tactics as DME fraud: using stolen or misused patient information, paying illegal kickbacks for referrals, and submitting inflated or false claims to federal programs. In both types of fraud, the perpetrators exploit gaps in oversight during high-demand periods—such as the pandemic or public health emergencies—to rapidly bill large amounts to Medicare, often with little or no patient interaction or verification.

These 2025 takedown includes criminal indictments and civil settlement agreements targeting this type of COVID-19 fraud. An indictment out of Illinois charged multiple individuals, including a physician, for their roles in a kickback scheme. According to the indictment, the defendants caused laboratories in Illinois and Texas to submit fraudulent claims to the HRSA COVID-19 Uninsured Program, ultimately receiving over $293 million in payments. The physician involved allegedly misused patient information—including data from a former hospital employer—to falsely claim that uninsured individuals had submitted samples for COVID-19 testing. In reality, many of the patients had not submitted samples at all. Defendants submitted claims through Texas labs they owned, despite those labs being non-operational. The proceeds were then laundered through various financial accounts to disguise the funds’ origin. Charges include wire fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, HIPAA violations, and conspiracy to defraud the United States. Authorities have seized a Rolls Royce Phantom and more than $104 million in assets linked to the fraud.

The charges being brought by the federal government in these cases carry significant criminal penalties and collateral consequences, especially for licensed medical professionals. At Conaway & Strickler, we are highly experienced in defending against these types of claims. Contact us to schedule a consultation and discuss your case.

26 U.S.C. § 7201 defines what is tax evasion.  It states in relevant part that any person who willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any tax imposed by this title or the payment thereof shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $100,000 ($500,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.

Federal prosecutors might also add additional charges beyond tax evasion. Those charges could include conspiracy charges, under 18 U.S.C. § 371, or tax fraud under 26 U.S.C. § 7206.  The United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) recently released its Tax Fraud Report for fiscal year 2023. It states that off the 64,124 cases reported to the Commission in fiscal year 2023, 363 involved tax fraud (down 27% since FY 2019).  It is unclear if this downward trend will continue.

Recently, a man in New Jersey plead guilty to tax evasion. According to the Department of Justice, “for tax years 2015 and 2016, Matthew Tucci, of West Long Branch, NJ, filed tax returns that stated he owed more than $2 million in taxes for both years. Despite admitting that he owed those taxes, Tucci did not fully pay them when they were due. Instead, Tucci purchased real estate and engaged in a series of transactions designed to conceal his interest in those properties.

In 2017, the IRS sent notices to Tucci that he owed taxes, interest, and penalties for 2015 and 2016. After receiving these notices, Tucci transferred multiple properties to an entity owned by another individual, but he continued to exert control over at least two of them. Of the two properties Tucci continued to control, he sold one and refinanced the other. Tucci used the proceeds from these transactions to pay his personal expenses rather than his tax debts. In 2019, Tucci submitted documents to the IRS that falsely claimed that he had no connection to the entity that owned the 12 properties.

He faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison as well as a period of supervised release, restitution, and monetary penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.”

In another case, a Florida businessman was sentenced to prison for tax evasion.  According to the  Department of Justice, “David Albert Fletcher, of Deltona, Florida owned and operated furniture liquidations businesses, including Century Liquidators. For tax years 2004 through 2013, Fletcher did not timely file his federal income tax returns or pay the taxes he owed. After an audit, the IRS assessed a total of $1.7 million in taxes, interest, and penalties against him.

To evade collection of these taxes, Fletcher concealed his income and assets from the IRS. For example, Fletcher used nominees to hide his purchases of luxury vehicles, including Rolls Royces. Fletcher also filed false income tax returns that understated his income by several million dollars, and when an IRS special agent interviewed him, Fletcher falsely represented the amount of income he earned.

In addition to his prison sentence, U.S. District Judge Wendy Berger for the Middle District of Florida ordered Fletcher to serve three years of supervised release and to pay approximately $7,112,689 in restitution to the United States.”

Recently, Meg Strickler was able to ensure that no tax evasion charges were filed against her client.  Contact us if you think you might be facing tax evasion or tax fraud charges.  We are here to help.

• Wire fraud
• Mail fraud
• Bank fraud
• Tax fraud (tax evasion or false statements)
• Healthcare fraud/FCA
• Medicare/Medicaid fraud
• PPP loan or COVID relief fraud
• Securities fraud
• Mortgage fraud
• Immigration or visa fraud
• Government contract fraud
• Identity theft or benefits fraud
• Trafficking in Counterfeit Goods or Services
• Anti kickbacks
• AML

The FBI gives this list of frauds and the DOJ publishes some of their cases here.

Fraud investigations can begin in a number of ways. In many cases, they are triggered by:

• A whistleblower or former employee
• A suspicious activity report
• A suspicious activity report (SAR) from a bank or financial institution
• Data flagged by automated fraud detection software
• A referral from another federal agency (e.g., IRS, SBA, USPS, HHS)
• A civil audit or regulatory review that uncovers irregularities
• Investigative journalism or public tips
• Problems in real estate transactions.  (FINCEN’s new rule extends Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) obligations to investment advisers involved in these transactions)

Once red flags are detected, the matter is referred to a federal investigative agency. These can include:

• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
• Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI)
• Office of Inspector General (OIG)
• Postal Inspection Service (USPIS)
• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
• Health and Human Services (HHS)
• Small Business Administration (SBA)

If you have been contacted by federal agents FOR ANY REASON, contact a federal criminal defense attorney immediately.  Do not speak period.  If you have received a grand jury subpoena, contact a federal criminal defense attorney immediately.  If you have received a target letter, contact a federal criminal defense attorney immediately.  If you are being audited by the IRS, SBA, HHS or another agency, contact a federal criminal defense attorney immediately. It never hurts in this  last instance to have sage advice before the investigation goes any further.

At Conaway & Strickler, PC, we are here to help. Contact us to discuss your options.

Jury Selection also known as Voir Dire

Jury selection is one of the most important parts of a federal criminal trial.  It will start with about 40 potential jurors brought in. Usually we move our chairs to the other side of the table to face them. We ask general questions, then individual questions. Then, we deliberate on who to choose. Then, the court asks us to do our strikes, and then a jury is empaneled.

This usually takes a full day.

Opening Statement

After the jury has been empaneled and sworn, and loads of logistical information is given to the jurors by the judge, then the federal district court judge will invite the AUSA to give their opening statement. Like the jury selection, the opening statement is a critical part of a federal criminal trial.

The purpose of the opening statement is to allow the parties to explain to the jury what the case is about. While the parties may discuss the evidence, and explain what they believe it will show, they are not allowed to make arguments about what they think the evidence means.

After the AUSA has given their opening statement, which they are required to do because they have the burden of proof, the federal district court judge will ask the defense attorney if (s)he wishes to give an opening statement. The judge asks this in the form of a question because the defense attorney is not required to give an opening statement.

In a criminal case, the federal criminal defense lawyer may either give an opening statement, waive the opening statement, or waive the opening statement at that time, instead giving their opening statement at the close of the AUSA’s case.  If this was a multi defendant trial, the judge usually will go in order as it is depicted on the most recent indictment.

Direct Examination begins after we are done with the opening statements.  The AUSA will begin calling their witnesses.  Federal criminal defense attorney teaches advanced evidence to LLM and JD students and GSU law and trial techniques at Emory Law.  She literally teaches the Federal Rules of Evidence on what comes in at trial and how to do direct and cross examinations to law students.

Most direct examinations include three stages:

1. Introduction and background of the witness.
2. Laying the foundation of their relation to the case
3. Substantive questions about the case.

Like all criminal cases, in a federal criminal trial, the entire burden of proof is on the AUSA. In thinking how to proceed, an AUSA will consider all elements of the crimes alleged. This is because every crime is made up of parts, or elements. The elements are set forth in the instructions to the jury. To prevail, the AUSA must prove each and every element of the crime. Consequently, the AUSA will call witnesses that have information they believe will help persuade the jury that an element has been satisfied.

Because this is direct examination, the AUSA may only ask open ended questions. This is often as simple as, “what happened next?” A question used for direct examination may not suggest an answer. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for the AUSA to tell the witness what they think happened, and then ask the witness to agree. Thus, the AUSA cannot properly say “and the next thing that happened was….do you agree?” This leading question would constitute cross-examination. The party who called the witness may not “lead” the witness and may only ask direct examination questions. Such a leading question would likely prompt the objection of any of us federal criminal defense lawyers.

There are some exceptions to this rule, however, and some leading questions are allowed during direct examination. For example, Rule 611 of the Federal Rules of Evidence suggests that an AUSA may use cross-examination as necessary to “develop the witnesses testimony.” Leading questions may also be used with a “hostile witness.”

Once the witness has testified on direct, the defense lawyer will get to conduct Cross-Examination of the government’s witnesses.

We may ask questions of the government’s witness after the AUSA has completed their direct examination. Again, the defense attorney is not required to ask questions because they have no burden of proof. While there may be strategic reasons for waiving a witness, in some instances, we will engage in extensive and detailed questioning or cross-examination of the government witness.

Most cross-examination questions include the following:

1. We draft question to elicit any positive information from the witness.
2. We work to limit the damage done by the cross-examination.
3. We will impeach the witness where appropriate.

The defense attorney’s questioning can proceed by either direct or leading questions. A leading question is one that suggests the answer. This is called cross-examination. The purpose of cross-examination is to expand on the witness’s testimony, and possibly to show that the witness lacks credibility or that their fact statements are wrong or misleading.

Cross-examination may also be used by us defense attorneys to show the jury that the government witness lacks actual knowledge, or that their knowledge is limited. This is especially true for expert witnesses. To expand on the above example, a defense attorney may cross-examine a forensic computer expert by asking them questions to show that they lack credentials. A cross-examination like this might be a simple statement to the witness such as “you don’t have a computer science degree?”

At the end of the government’s case, when there are no more witnesses or evidence, the AUSA will tell the judge that they “rest.” This means the AUSA’s case is completed.

At this juncture, we will all orally ask for a Motion for Directed Verdict

In a federal criminal case, a motion for directed verdict is a motion requesting the judge to acquit the defendant as a matter of law. If the motion is granted, the case is done, and the defendant is declared the winner. A motion for directed verdict is also called a judgment as a matter of law.

While a motion for judgment as a matter of law may be made at any time before the case is submitted to the jury, the first opportunity for a federal criminal defense attorney to make such a motion is after the government has rested its case. In the attorney’s motion, we will offer to the judge any applicable law and explain why, based on this law, the facts of the case entitle the defendant to be found not guilty. An AUSA may not make a motion for directed verdict after the defense has rested.

In a typical federal criminal trial, once the AUSA has indicated that the government has rested its case, the district court judge will instruct the bailiff to escort the jury out of the courtroom. The judge will then ask the defense attorney if they have a motion for directed verdict. If the answer is no, then the jury will be brought back into the courtroom and the case will continue. Motions for directed verdict are always made outside the presence of the jury.

A federal criminal defense attorney may also make a motion for directed verdict at the end of the attorney’s case; meaning, after the defense has indicated to the court that they rest. This is because, as indicated, Rule 50 of the Federal Rules of Procedure allow a motion as a matter of law to be made any time before the jury has reached its verdict.

DEFENSE: 

The defendant in a criminal case enjoys a presumption of innocence. One of the benefits of this presumption is that a person accused of a crime does not have an obligation to prove their innocence to the jury. This means there is no obligation to call any witnesses or produce any evidence. However, depending on the facts and circumstances of a case, it may be in the your best interest to call witness or provide evidence.

So, should any of us federal criminal defense attorneys call a witnesses, just as when the AUSA calls witnesses, the attorney may only ask this witness direct examination question, and the AUSA may cross-examine this witness using leading questions.

One of the witnesses that is available only to the defense attorney is the defendant. In a criminal case the accused has the right to remain silent. Therefore, only the defense attorney can call the accused to the stand. Whether to call the accused as a witness is often one of the most difficult questions for a federal criminal defense attorney. However, the final answer to this question resides completely with YOU. The decision must not be made by the lawyer.

Once all of the defense attorneys call all of their witnesses (if any), they will indicate to the court that “the defense rests.”

Next, we move to The Government’s Rebuttal Witnesses

The defense may call rebuttal witnesses after it has rested because the government has the burden of proof. Rebuttal witnesses serve largely the same function as cross-examination in that they are used as part of an attempt, in this case by the government, to disprove evidence submitted by the defendant or to disprove what the defense witnesses said. It is rare, but possible, for the federal district court judge to allow what is called surrebuttal on the part of the defense. A surrebuttal witness is called by a party to respond to the opposing party’s rebuttal.

Closing Arguments

Once all the witnesses have been called, both the AUSA and we, the federal defense criminal defense attorneys, have presented all their evidence, and both have indicated to the court that they have rested, the next step is closing argument.

According to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the government goes first, the defense attorneys goes next, then the government gets another opportunity to rebut what the defense attorney has argued. The government gets to go first, and last, because they have the burden of proof.

Unlike the opening statement, in their final arguments, the AUSA and the federal criminal defense attorney may not only summarize the evidence presented but may also forcefully argue why the jury should find in their favor.

It is important to note, that district court judges will typically deny us the time, at the end of the trial, to leave and prepare our closing arguments.  It is typical to move right into closing arguments after all the evidence has been received by the jury, and any directed verdict motions made and denied.

The Jury is then instructed as to the applicable law through what is known as jury charges.

The main purpose of a jury is to resolve issues of fact. A jury will reach its verdict by taking the law as provided to them by the judge and applying to this law to the facts as they find them. In this way they will arrive at their verdict. This law is set forth in the jury instructions.

Judges routinely state they will rely mainly on the pattern instructions prepared by the Circuit Committee on Pattern Criminal Jury instructions.  We certainly research notable and useful jury charges and file such if we determine the pattern charges are not sufficient.

Deliberations and Verdict

The final stage in a federal criminal trial will be jury deliberations and verdict. The first thing the jury will do is select, often by voting, who will be their foreperson. Pattern jury instruction for the 11th circuit provides that the foreperson’s job is to do two things: (1) guide the jury’s deliberations and (2) be a liaison for communications with the court.

If the jury has questions, then normally, the foreperson will write it down, give it to the court officer who then gives the question to the judge. The jury may not tell anyone outside the jury where their “vote” stands or anything else about their deliberations. There is, however, no rule that says that only the foreperson may write down questions or give them to the court officer. In this way all jurors are “equal”.

In a criminal case the verdict must be unanimous in favor of acquittal or conviction. In a federal criminal case, a jury will be instructed they are to continue their deliberations until they have reached a unanimous decision. Pattern Jury Instructions on this issue provide that to find a defendant guilty in a federal criminal trial, the jury must unanimously agree that the government has overcome the presumption of innocence as to every element of the crime alleged and have done so with evidence that proves the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

As set forth in another Pattern Jury Instruction, the jury will be told that they are not to consider punishment in their deliberations. Punishment is solely the province of the judge presiding over the case.

Once the jury has reached its verdict, another Pattern Jury Instruction provides that the foreperson mark the appropriate place for guilty or not guilty, have each member sign the form, then give it to the court officer, who will then give the form to the judge.

Upon learning that the jury has reached its verdict, the judge will resume the trial, making sure the defendant is in the courtroom. Finally, the verdict will be read in court.

Once the verdict is read, if you are found guilty, the deputies (who have moved in to position for this moment) will come forward and ask you to put your hands behind your back and take off shoe laces, jewelry, etc in order to go in to custody.  The federal criminal defense attorney immediately asks that the defendant remain out on an appeal bond, and the judge decides on whether or not to take the defendant in to custody at this time.

If you are found not guilty on all charges, then the case is over and closed.

Should you have any further questions about federal criminal defense trials please contact us.  We are here to help.

Kousisis comes before the Court after a Philadelphia-area government contractor was found guilty of fraud after it failed to comply with a contract provision intended to promote diversity. Stamatios Kousisis and Alpha Painting and Construction Co., Inc. (Alpha) secured two substantial contracts with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). These contracts mandated a certain percentage of work to be allocated to Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBEs). Kousisis and his company misrepresented their compliance with this requirement by using a DBE as a mere pass-through entity, thereby falsely claiming adherence to the DBE participation goals. Despite this deception, the contracted work was completed to PennDOT’s satisfaction, and no direct financial loss was incurred by the department.

Federal prosecutors charged Kousisis and Alpha with wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and making false statements. The prosecution’s argument was based on the “fraudulent inducement” theory, suggesting that the defendants obtained the contracts through deceptive promises, even though PennDOT did not suffer a financial loss. Ultimately, Kousisis was sentenced to 70 months’ imprisonment for the multi-million dollar fraud he perpetrated following a jury trial in 2018.

However, the defense has argued that for a fraud conviction, there must be an intent to cause economic harm, which they claim was absent in this case. During oral arguments, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson posed the question, “Why isn’t this a classic scheme to obtain property under false pretenses?” For years in federal white-collar cases, the “scheme” itself has always been recognized as the “harm” that triggers application of the federal fraud statutes. Despite that precedent, defense argued: “If there’s no harm that occurs in those transactions, there is no fraud.”

It seems that conservative justices were receptive to the defendant’s argument. Chief Justice John Roberts suggested that “such crimes were better handled by state prosecutors.” Justice Samuel Alito expressed that “the court really doesn’t like the federalization of white-collar prosecutions and wants that to be done in state court and is really hostile to this whole enterprise.”

The outcome of Kousisis v. United States holds the potential to redefine the scope of federal white-collar prosecutions. A decision favoring the defendants could lead to a substantial shift in prosecutorial responsibilities from federal to state authorities. A ruling that limits federal jurisdiction in such cases would compel companies to adapt by focusing more on state-level compliance and legal frameworks. Engaging with experienced legal counsel will be essential for businesses to remain compliant and mitigate risks in this evolving legal landscape.

The indictment also charges Ranjit Gupta and Rupesh Agarwal, former executives of a renewable-energy company with securities that had traded on the New York Stock Exchange, and Cyril Cabanes, Saurabh Agarwal and Deepak Malhotra, former employees of a Canadian institutional investor, with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in connection with a bribery scheme also perpetrated by Gautam S. Adani, Sagar R. Adani and Vneet S. Jaain, involving one of the world’s largest solar energy projects.

The indictment alleges that more than $250 Million in bribes were promised to secure solar enery contracts worth 2 billion dollars over two decades.

The SEC also unveiled a complaint charging Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani, executives of Adani Green Energy Ltd., and Cyril Cabanes, an executive of Azure Power Global Ltd., for conduct arising out of the same massive bribery scheme discussed in the EDNY. complaint. The SEC also alleges that the bribery scheme was orchestrated to enable the two renewable energy companies to capitalize on a multi-billion-dollar solar energy project that the companies had been awarded by the Indian government. During the alleged scheme, Adani Green raised more than $175 million from U.S. investors and Azure Power’s stock was traded on the New York Stock Exchange.

The indictment alleges, among other things:

1. There was a FBI raid in March 2023.   Gautam Adani failed to inform SEBI and the Indian stock exchange of this FBI raid and the DOJ investigation, which he was required to do. But he also thereafter lied when he denied that either had happened.
2. False statements in the annual reports. Guatam Adani emailed himself photographs of the search warrant of his nephew in March 2023.  He will be unable to say he was not aware of being investigation at that time.
3. False statements to US investors
4. When the search was executed on the nephew, Sagar Adani, electronic devices were seized.  This will be a treasure trove of data for the government to use in their prosecution.  The government cites “bribe notes” that Sagar kept on his phone to track specific details of bribes offered and promised to government officials.  It may very well be possible as this case proceeds that a superceding indictment is forthcoming and both Gautam and Sagar Adani will be charged with FCPA violations as well.
5. Co-Conspirator #1 and #2 may have cooperated with the government, and thus they may help corroborate what “numero uno” and other code names meant when texting amongst themselves about the conspiracy.

The defendants do not live in the United States, and it appears only one has dual citizenship in the US.  So, should any of these defendants enter US soil, they will be immediately detained and transferred to the EDNY for processing. Both Gautam and Sagar Adani have not been arrested yet and US prosecutors would need to ask the Indian government to extradite them under the terms of the countries’ extradition treaty.  India would need to consider whether the crime he was charged with in the US is also a crime in India, whether the charges are politically motivated or whether he could face inhumane treatment in the US.  As Meg Strickler stated in The Quint, there probably will be a superceding indictment that will include more charges.

Conaway & Strickler, PC handles many bribery cases.  Contact us if you need more information or are facing such charges.

Early on, Conaway & Strickler defended cases that stemmed from activity on classic peer-to-peer applications like Limewire.  These type of networks were simply software applications that provided a central hub for various computers to connect.  Napster, for example, was a peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing service that allowed users to share and download music files from other users’ computers.  These types of programs were utilized to distribute music, movies and child pornography.  Law enforcement was able to track those cases more easily.

Today, however, the government has also become well versed in programs like BitTorrent, Limewire and e-Donkey, among others.  When a hard drive or device is analyzed by the government, they now will produce a report detailing their forensic examination.  They will detail all of the evidence found on the device showing evidence of P2P Networking, search history, bookmarks  and they even cite images or image fragments found in cache locations.  Here is a recent example of a federal criminal prosecution of someone who downloaded images from the BitTorrent Network.

The P2P software programs allow the P2P networks to break large files into smaller segments that are then shared independently. The original purpose of this was to only optimize the download process by balancing the load among multiple users but it also increased the overall download speeds, as users can simultaneously download multiple segments from different sources.  BUT, in early prosecutions of federal child pornography cases using P2P applications, the government was unable to show the actual images on the devices anymore.   But, as described above, it is rare for a sophisticated user to have any actual images of CSAM on their devices.  So, today, the government’s forensic report will draws a picture of all activities on the device to show that the user intentionally downloaded child pornography.  We, at Conaway & Strickler, are well versed on the technicalities of defending a complex case like this and have years of experience of defending federal child pornography cases nationwide.  We also have a variety of top notch experts ready to assist us to mirror images these devices in order to do our forensics to mount the proper defense to any federal criminal charges lodged.

Contact us anytime if you have any questions. We are here to help.

In investigating PPP loan fraud, the government first looks at the application itself.  How many employees does the company have?  Does that number match their payroll tax filings?  Are the 941‘s the same as what is on file at the IRS?  Has the owner(s) been convicted of or pled guilty to a felony with the past 5 years?  Do the bank statements submitted on the PPP loan application match the actual bank statements? Are there business expenses on the bank statements?  Was the bank account in a business checking account? When was the entity created?  Did the company apply for more than one loan?  Does the individual owner have multiple entities and apply for multiple loans?  Any inaccurate statements on the application can result in a charge under Under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 (bank fraud) – making false statements to an FDIC-insured financial institution, or making false statements to the SBA.  In addition, the CARES Act also has requirements for how companies use, and account for the use of, PPP loan funds.  Some of the more outrageous PPP loan fraud prosecutions have resulted due to individuals buying Range Rovers, Lamborghinis and rolex watches with PPP loan proeeeds, i.e. converting PPP loan funds for personal use.  Also, when seeking forgiveness for loans, companies must be very careful in what they submit.  Any false documentation submitted can result in prosecution.

So, should the government be inquiring about your PPP loan(s) or EIDL loans or any disaster relief funds, it is important to contact us immediately.  Being evasive or being unable to produce documentation of PPP Compliance will only increase issues that you will be facing.  Allow Conaway & Strickler, PC to help you with expert advice from experienced federal counsel. We are very familiar with the federal criminal investigative process with the SBA-OIG, IRS and the DOJ.

Conaway & Strickler, PC handles PPP loans nationwide. Meg Strickler has 25 plus years experience fighting federal criminal cases in the district courts across the country.

The FAA’s zero-tolerance policy, implemented in 2021, marked a shift from warnings to immediate enforcement. With incidents like physical assaults on passengers and crew members, the FAA has consistently referred the most egregious cases to the FBI. The FAA can impose civil penalties up to $37,000 per violation, but when these cases are referred for criminal prosecution, offenders face much harsher outcomes.

In 2023, over 1,240 incidents of unruly passenger behavior were reported. Of those, 43 cases were referred to the FBI for criminal prosecution due to their severity. These cases often involve physical altercations or inappropriate behavior that pose a threat to the safety of everyone on board. The FAA’s clear stance on holding individuals accountable shows that passengers who engage in such behavior will face serious repercussions.You can read more about the FAA’s referral process and efforts in their official statement and in further detail from FAA’s unruly passenger policy page.

Once referred to the FBI, many unruly passenger cases lead to federal charges, especially when sexual misconduct or violence is involved. These cases often involve unwanted touching, and allegations of individuals under the influence of alcohol or medication. Federal prison time and long-term consequences await those convicted of these serious crimes. For more information about how the FBI and federal prosecutors handle these cases, you can review this detailed account from the Department of Justice.

Beyond hefty fines, individuals charged with federal crimes for unruly behavior aboard a flight face significant prison time. Sexual misconduct in particular is treated severely, with offenders often sentenced to years in federal prison. The FAA and FBI are clear in their mission: passengers who pose a threat will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

For those facing such charges, it is crucial to seek legal representation immediately. At our firm, we are experienced in defending against federal charges related to in-flight incidents and can provide the guidance needed to navigate these complex cases. Contact us today for a consultation.

What Is the New FINCEN Rule?

FINCEN’s new rule extends Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) obligations to investment advisers involved in residential real estate transactions. The aim is to prevent illicit financial activities in an industry known for large cash transactions that can serve as vehicles for money laundering, fraud, and other financial crimes.

Previously, residential real estate investments, particularly those conducted through shell companies or trusts, offered a level of anonymity that bad actors could exploit. This new rule eliminates some of that opacity by requiring reporting and disclosure obligations for entities and individuals involved in these transactions.

The final rule imposes several key requirements:

1. Increased Reporting and Disclosure: Individuals and firms engaged in residential real estate investments must now report detailed information regarding the identity of buyers and sellers, the source of funds, and other financial details. This includes both U.S. and foreign investors, adding an extra layer of scrutiny for cross-border transactions.
2. Enhanced Due Diligence: Investment advisers and firms must now conduct thorough due diligence on clients and the source of their funds, ensuring that they comply with AML/CFT standards. This may involve verifying identities, examining financial records, and reporting suspicious activities to FINCEN.
3. Penalties for Non-Compliance: The rule includes penalties for individuals and firms that fail to meet the new AML/CFT obligations. Non-compliance could lead to fines, sanctions, or even criminal charges depending on the severity of the infraction.

For real estate investors, the new FINCEN rule adds a new layer of legal and financial oversight. While the intention is to weed out bad actors, the burden of proof is now on investors and their advisers to ensure compliance. This means that investors will need to be more transparent in their transactions, particularly regarding the source of their funds. Without proof of the funds coming from a legitimate source, criminal charges of money laundering and fraud can result.

As the FINCEN rule takes effect, compliance will be a critical concern for many in the real estate industry. Our firm is experienced in navigating the complex landscape of financial regulations, including defending clients against charges of money laundering and related financial crimes. We can help you understand your obligations under the new FINCEN rule and defend against any accusations of non-compliance or criminal misconduct.

This new regulation represents a major shift for the residential real estate industry. Whether you’re an investor or an adviser, staying compliant is no longer optional—it’s the law. The new FINCEN rule is set to take effect on December 1, 2025. If you have questions about the new rule and how it affects your business, contact ustoday for a consultation.

What reports are generated from my devices?

Cellebrite reports provide information about phone calls and text messages; but now it also provides a report on the data stored on these devices such as voicemails, images, and browsing history. From GPS location data to social media activity, cell phones can provide a treasure trove for law enforcement agencies to use to build their cases.

What protections do I have to prevent law enforcement from searching my devices?

Laws on the admission and use of this evidence in court are still evolving. In the Georgia Supreme Court case State v. Wilson, the court ruled search warrants for cell phone contents must specify the items being sought. This is to prevent a general search of a person’s belongings, which is prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.

Do I have the same legal rights at the border that I would elsewhere in the United States?

The Supreme Court ruled that the police must get a warrant before searching someone’s cell phone in Riley v. California. The Supreme Court held that a warrant is generally required before a search of a cell phone seized incident to arrest. BUT, at the border, there is less protection. According to US Customs and Border Protection a person may be chosen for inspection for many different random reasons and thus there is less protections when crossing the border in or out of the US. What this means – you can be pulled for a secondary inspection and all of your devices can be searched without a warrant. They can also get an image from the hard drive of these devices and / or seize the devices at the border.

What do I do if I am asked to give my cell phone to law enforcement?

If you know your rights, you can comply when necessary. So, for example, if you are traveling internationally – do not travel with devices that you would not want searched. Furthermore, if you are driving and pulled over with drugs or a high amount of currency in your car, etc, your cell phone and / or other devices WILL be seized and analyzed.

And, please remember anything uploaded to the cloud is fair game for law enforcement. That’s a broad statement – but when you signed up for Instagram, Whats App, Google, TikTok, Facebook, Signal, Twitter/X, etc, you signed away any privacy rights. Those companies are fast to comply with law enforcement subpoenas giving whatever you posted/uploaded immediately to them.

What is a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR)?

A Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) is a document that financial institutions are legally required to file with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) when they detect potentially suspicious behavior involving financial transactions. Once filed, these reports are sent to FinCEN, a division of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, which shares the information with law enforcement agencies for further investigation if necessary.

Why Do Banks File SARs?

Banks must comply with a variety of regulations designed to prevent financial crimes. One of the core elements of these regulations is monitoring customer transactions for anything that might indicate illegal or suspicious activity. A SAR is typically filed when a bank suspects that a transaction, or series of transactions, might involve:

• Money laundering: Attempting to disguise the origins of illegally obtained money by passing it through a legitimate banking system.
• Fraud: Including wire fraud, identity theft, and other deceptive financial activities.
• Structuring: Breaking down large sums of money into smaller deposits to avoid triggering reporting requirements (also known as “smurfing”).
• Unexplained large transactions: Transactions that don’t align with an individual’s or business’s typical activity or appear inconsistent with known financial patterns.

Common Triggers for SARs

Financial institutions are trained to spot red flags, and there are a number of scenarios that could trigger a SAR filing. Here are some of the most common:

1. Unusually Large Transactions: If an individual or business is suddenly moving unusually large amounts of money, especially in cash, this can raise red flags. Large deposits, withdrawals, or transfers that don’t align with normal activity patterns may prompt the bank to investigate further.
2. Frequent Cash Deposits Below $10,000: To avoid the $10,000 threshold that triggers an automatic Currency Transaction Report (CTR), some individuals break down larger sums into smaller deposits (a practice called structuring). If a bank detects this behavior, it will likely file a SAR.
3. Wire Transfers to High-Risk Countries: International wire transfers to or from countries that are known for terrorist activity, money laundering, or lacking robust financial regulations may result in a SAR filing.
4. Multiple Accounts Under One Name: Using multiple accounts to shuffle money back and forth—especially if the accounts seem unrelated to legitimate business or personal activities—can appear suspicious.
5. Account Activity Inconsistent with Known Business Practices: If a company typically processes small, regular transactions and suddenly starts handling large, irregular amounts, it might trigger suspicion. Likewise, if a personal account shows business-level activity, this could raise alarms.
6. Use of Shell Companies: Banks scrutinize accounts associated with shell companies that lack a clear purpose or business activity, as they are often used in money laundering schemes.
7. Unexplained Source of Funds: If the origin of deposited funds is unclear, or if large amounts of money are transferred without any legitimate explanation, the bank may file a SAR.

The Impact of a SAR Filing

When a bank files a SAR, it is confidential. The individual or business subject to the report is not directly informed; However, the bank may decide to take action based on its findings, which can include:

• Account closures: If the bank believes the activity is risky or potentially illegal, it may close your account or freeze any available funds.
• Increased monitoring: Your account may come under closer scrutiny, with more restrictions placed on transactions.
• Law enforcement involvement: If the behavior in question warrants it, the SAR could lead to a broader investigation by federal or state law enforcement agencies.

What to Do if You Believe a SAR Has Been Filed Against You

While you won’t be directly informed if a SAR has been filed, you may suspect something is amiss if your bank account is frozen, closed, or you’re contacted by law enforcement regarding your financial activity. If you find yourself in this situation, here are some steps to take:

1. Seek Legal Counsel: The most important thing you can do is consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney. A SAR filing could be the beginning of a serious investigation, and you’ll want legal guidance to protect your rights and interests.
2. Gather Financial Records: Be prepared to provide your attorney with all relevant financial records. This can help explain the nature of your transactions and demonstrate that they are legitimate.
3. Do Not Attempt to Explain Yourself to the Bank: Anything you say to the bank could be misinterpreted or used against you in a later investigation. Your attorney will be able to navigate these communications appropriately.

A Suspicious Activity Report can be a precursor to serious legal trouble, but it’s important to remember that it is not an accusation of a crime. Banks are required to report anything that appears suspicious, even if the behavior is ultimately lawful. If you find yourself facing consequences related to an SAR filing, don’t wait—contact us today for a consultation and take control of your situation before it escalates. If you are facing financial crime allegations, our skilled team of criminal defense attorneys is here to help.

What is the “Free Money Hack”?

The trend usually involves TikTok users claiming they have found ways to manipulate the financial system, offering viewers methods to “hack” or exploit bank accounts, cash apps, or credit systems to obtain free money. Some of these schemes involve:

• Overdraft exploits: Encouraging users to overdraw bank accounts and then supposedly avoid the consequences.
• Fake check schemes: Depositing fraudulent checks into accounts and withdrawing the funds before the bank detects the fraud.
• Refund fraud: Filing fake claims with companies to get refunds for purchases that were never made.

These tactics promise fast cash with minimal effort, but what they really deliver is financial and legal disaster.

Why Following the Trend is Illegal

What these TikTok videos don’t explain is the serious legal consequences of participating in such schemes. Fraud, theft, and exploiting banking systems for personal gain are criminal acts, regardless of how trendy or harmless they may seem in a 60-second clip.

Here are some common legal charges that can result from participating in these activities:

1. Bank Fraud: This is a federal crime that can result in hefty fines and imprisonment. Intentionally defrauding a financial institution is illegal under U.S. law, and following these TikTok hacks can quickly escalate into a federal investigation.
2. Wire Fraud: Many of these hacks involve electronic transfers or communications, which falls under wire fraud. This also carries severe penalties, including long prison sentences.
3. Check Fraud: Depositing fake or altered checks with the intent to withdraw funds is considered check fraud. Even if you think you’re being clever by pulling out the money before the bank catches on, it’s still a criminal act.
4. Identity Theft: Some of these schemes suggest using fake names or other people’s banking details, which could lead to identity theft charges. This is a serious offense with strict penalties.
5. Theft by Deception: If you knowingly mislead a financial institution or another individual to gain money or assets, this is classified as theft by deception. Penalties can include jail time and significant fines.

Participating in these “hacks” isn’t just risky from a financial perspective—it’s a direct pathway to legal repercussions that can follow you for the rest of your life. Depending on the scale of the fraud or theft, you could face:

• Criminal Charges: These could range from misdemeanors to felonies, depending on the amount of money involved and the nature of the crime.
• Restitution: If convicted, you could be required to pay back any money that was wrongfully obtained, along with additional penalties.
• Permanent Criminal Record: A fraud conviction can make it difficult to secure future employment, housing, or loans, and can damage your reputation permanently.

The allure of easy money is tempting, but it’s important to remember that many social media trends, like the “free money hack,” come with significant risks. Engaging in these activities can lead to criminal charges that affect your financial future and personal freedom. Before following any advice from TikTok or other social media platforms, it’s vital to understand the full legal ramifications.

If you’ve been accused of fraud or any criminal activity related to online schemes, our experienced legal team is here to help. Don’t hesitate to contact us today for a free consultation. The legal system can be complex and unforgiving, but with the right defense, you can navigate the process and work toward the best possible outcome

He is charged with violating antifraud provisions of federal securities law. He may soon face DOJ charges as well. The antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws prohibit the use of fraudulent statements or schemes in connection with the purchase or sale of securities. These provisions apply to all securities transactions, including exempt transactions, and to statements made orally or in writing.

The primary anti-fraud statutory provision is Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which is codified in 15 U.S.C. § 78j. The SEC enforces this provision primarily through Rule 10b-5, which prohibits the use of any “device, scheme, or artifice to defraud”. Rule 10b-5 also imposes liability for any misstatement or omission of a material fact, or one that investors would think was important to their decision to buy or sell a security. A fact is considered material if there is a substantial likelihood that the information would have been viewed by a reasonable investor as having significantly altered the total mix of information available.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have been working together more often to combat unlawful tactics. They have thus strengthened their enforcement capabilities, leading to more effective identification and prosecution of insider trading and other securities violations.

If you have questions about whether or not you or your company are facing an investigation, contact us for further information. Our attorneys have represented many clients in SEC litigation and also when subsequent DOJ charges follow.

Airports are high security environments with strict rules enforced through law enforcement, federal agents, TSA checkpoints, drug-sniffing dogs, US Marshals aboard flights, and more. Being arrested at an airport is overwhelming, scary, and often times, completely unexpected. However, the consequences of these arrest can be serious and long-lasting. An arrest at an airport could lead to detention by law enforcement, criminal charges, and the need to retain legal representation.

If you are arrested at an airport, you may be taken into custody and transported to a detention center or police station where you will be held and processed until further legal proceedings. However, this does not always happen at the airport – you may leave the airport and later have a warrant issued for your arrest. In that case, you would still need to turn yourself in for processing with law enforcement. In either circumstance, it is essential to remember your rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to legal counsel. Contacting an experienced criminal defense attorney will help you navigate that distressing process with an advocate by your side.

Airport arrests can lead to severe criminal charges depending on the circumstances of your case. Common criminal charges in this context cover a broad range including drug offenses, sexual offenses, firearm offenses, DUIs, disorderly conduct, battery, theft, trafficking, and fraud. You could also be arrested at the airport for entirely unrelated criminal charges if you are simply identified and apprehended pursuant to an active arrest warrant, such as this recent arrest in Atlanta. Committing crimes while aboard an aircraft (like interfering with the performance of the duties of a flight crew) can lead to federal criminal charges and even more severe penalties. Many of these charges carry significant terms of imprisonment and hefty fines.

A strong legal defense is crucial if you have been arrested at an airport or are under investigation for alleged conduct at an airport. A skilled criminal defense attorney will guide you through the process, explain the charges against you, and evaluate the evidence to develop a defense strategy tailored to your case.

At Conaway and Strickler, we craft a defense based on the unique circumstances of each case and work closely with our clients to pursue favorable resolutions. If you have been arrested or detained at an airport, it is important to hire an attorney that is experienced in this area of law and can safeguard your rights throughout each step of the process. Contact us for a free consultation regarding your case.

Money Laundering refers to the illegal process of concealing the origins of money obtained through criminal activities, making it appear as if it comes from a legitimate source. This is criminalized under 18 U.S.C. § 1956. Money laundering using NFTs involves the illicit use of these digital assets to disguise the origins of illegally obtained funds. In this context, individuals create a fake record of sales on the blockchain by selling NFTs to themselves using different accounts. Once finished, they sell the NFT to an unsuspecting buyer and repeat the process.

Fraud has grown increasingly common in the crypto landscape due to its anonymous and decentralized nature. Fraud involving NFTs can manifest in various ways due to the unique characteristics of these digital assets. This is mostly being prosecuted as wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343. Some common forms of fraud associated with NFTs include:

1. Fake or Stolen NFTs: Fraudsters might create counterfeit NFTs by copying digital content and attempting to sell them as original or rare pieces. Additionally, they might steal someone else’s artwork or content and mint NFTs to sell without the creator’s consent.
2. False Representation: Individuals might misrepresent the ownership or authenticity of an NFT by falsely claiming it is associated with a particular creator or source, leading buyers to believe they are purchasing something of higher value or legitimacy than it actually holds.
3. Pump-and-Dump Schemes: Similar to traditional financial markets, some individuals may engage in pump-and-dump schemes within the NFT market. This involves artificially inflating the value of certain NFTs through false hype or manipulation, only to sell them off at a high price, leaving unsuspecting buyers with devalued assets.
4. Phishing and Scams: Scammers may use phishing techniques to trick NFT owners into providing their private keys or access to their digital wallets, allowing the fraudster to steal the NFTs. Additionally, fraudulent schemes and fake NFT marketplaces can deceive buyers and sellers into making transactions for non-existent or misrepresented NFTs.
5. Rug-Pull Scheme: As the term suggests, a “rug pull” refers to a scenario where the creator of an NFT and/or gaming project solicits investments and then abruptly abandons a project and fraudulently retains the project investors’ funds.

Law enforcement is continuing to prosecute these types of NFT schemes across the nation, in cases that allege millions of dollars being defrauded. Two defendants were charged for executing a $1 million NFT money laundering and fraud scheme in January 2022. In another NFT rug-pull, Aurelien Michel was charged for diverting $2.9 million dollars in an international fraud scheme.