The most important thing to understand is this:

Do not ignore a federal grand jury subpoena—but do not assume that you must immediately turn over everything requested or answer every question without first speaking with an experienced federal criminal defense attorney like Conaway & Strickler, PC.

Federal grand jury subpoenas carry the authority of the federal court. At the same time, important legal protections may apply, including the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, attorney-client privilege, other recognized privileges, and the ability in appropriate circumstances to challenge, limit, or seek modification of a subpoena.

What you do after receiving a subpoena can have significant consequences for the investigation and for your own potential exposure.

What Is a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena?

A federal grand jury investigates whether there is probable cause to believe a federal crime has been committed and whether criminal charges should be brought. In the Northern District of Georgia (or in another federal jurisdiction), federal grand juries regularly meet in Atlanta.

Federal prosecutors may use grand jury subpoenas to obtain evidence from individuals, businesses, financial institutions, healthcare providers, employers, accountants, and other potential witnesses or custodians of records.

A subpoena generally takes one of two forms.

A Subpoena to Testify (aka subpoena ad testificandum)

A subpoena may command you to appear before the grand jury and answer questions under oath.

This is not the same as being invited to participate in a voluntary interview with federal agents. A subpoena is compulsory legal process.

If you have any possibility of criminal exposure, appearing without first obtaining legal advice can be dangerous.

A Subpoena for Documents or Records (aka subpoena duces tecum)

A subpoena may instead—or additionally—require production of documents, data, communications, or other evidence.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) permits subpoenas seeking books, papers, documents, data, and other objects. The Rule also provides a mechanism for a court to quash or modify a subpoena if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.

Federal grand jury document subpoenas can be extraordinarily broad. They may seek years of:

• Emails and text messages;
• Financial and banking records;
• Corporate records;
• Contracts and invoices;
• Patient or medical records;
• Billing information;
• Accounting records;
• Tax records;
• Employee files;
• Electronic data;
• Phone records;
• Compliance materials; and
• Communications with third parties.

The fact that the government requested a document, however, does not automatically mean that the document must be produced without further analysis.

Do You Have to Comply With a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena?

Generally, yes—a valid federal grand jury subpoena cannot simply be ignored.

But “complying” with a subpoena does not necessarily mean immediately producing everything the government requests.

Contact us so we can discuss and assess whether there are grounds to object to the subpoena, negotiate its scope, assert applicable privileges, seek additional time for compliance, or ask the court to quash or modify it.

That analysis should happen quickly.

The subpoena itself will ordinarily specify the date, time, and place for compliance. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)(2) states that a motion seeking to quash or modify a document subpoena should be made “promptly.”

Waiting until the return date can severely limit your options.

Am I a Witness, Subject, or Target?

One of the first questions an experienced federal criminal defense firm, like Conaway & Strickler, PC may try to determine is your status in the investigation.

In federal investigations, people commonly hear three terms:

Witness: Someone believed to possess information relevant to the investigation.

Subject: Someone whose conduct falls within the scope of the grand jury’s investigation.

Target: Someone prosecutors believe has substantial evidence linking them to a crime and whom prosecutors may be considering for indictment.

Receiving a subpoena does not, by itself, tell you which category applies.

A person may receive what appears to be a routine records subpoena while simultaneously being investigated personally.

For that reason, counsel may contact the Assistant United States Attorney handling the investigation before the client responds. Depending on the circumstances, counsel may seek information regarding the client’s status and determine whether compliance can be negotiated without unnecessarily increasing the client’s exposure.

Can I Assert the Fifth Amendment Before a Federal Grand Jury?

Potentially.

The Fifth Amendment protects individuals against compelled self-incrimination.

If answering a particular grand jury question could reasonably tend to incriminate you, the Fifth Amendment may provide a basis for declining to answer that question.

But asserting the Fifth Amendment before a federal grand jury is not something that should be improvised.

A witness generally cannot simply refuse to appear because the witness believes incriminating questions may be asked. The privilege ordinarily must be asserted in response to particular questions where an answer could be incriminating.

That is one reason obtaining legal advice before the appearance date is so important.

Does the Fifth Amendment Protect Documents?

This question is considerably more complicated.

The Fifth Amendment generally does not protect the contents of voluntarily created documents merely because those documents contain incriminating information.

But producing documents can itself sometimes communicate information.

By producing records, a person may implicitly communicate that:

• The documents exist;
• The documents are authentic;
• The person possesses or controls them; or
• The documents produced are responsive to the government’s request.

This is known as the act-of-production doctrine.

The United States Supreme Court has recognized that the act of producing subpoenaed documents can, under certain circumstances, have a testimonial component protected by the Fifth Amendment.

Whether that protection applies depends heavily on the facts, including who received the subpoena, what records are requested, whether the government already knows the records exist, and whether the records are personal or held in a representative capacity for an entity.

This area of law is technical and highly fact-specific. A subpoena recipient should not assume either that the Fifth Amendment protects all requested records or that it protects none of them.

What About Corporate and Business Records?

Different rules may apply when a subpoena seeks records belonging to a corporation or other collective entity.

A business owner, officer, employee, or records custodian may be required to produce entity records in circumstances where that same person could potentially assert a Fifth Amendment privilege concerning personal testimony or personal records.

This distinction can become especially important in federal investigations involving:

• Healthcare companies;
• Medical practices;
• Pharmacies;
• Laboratories;
• Government contractors;
• Financial institutions;
• Closely held businesses;
• Accounting and tax matters; and
• Alleged fraud schemes.

Before producing company records, counsel should determine who owns the records, in what capacity the recipient possesses them, and whether producing them could create additional legal issues for the individual or company.

What If the Subpoena Requests Attorney-Client Communications?

Attorney-client privilege may protect confidential communications between an attorney and client made for the purpose of obtaining or providing legal advice.

A grand jury subpoena does not automatically eliminate that privilege.

If responsive documents include potentially privileged communications, counsel may need to identify and preserve those objections rather than simply producing the materials.

Privilege disputes in federal grand jury investigations can become complex. The Eleventh Circuit has addressed litigation involving grand jury subpoenas seeking materials claimed to be protected by attorney-client privilege, including disputes concerning the crime-fraud exception.

Other protections may also apply depending on the circumstances, including attorney work-product protection and privileges applicable to particular professional relationships.

The key is to identify privilege issues before production occurs.

Once privileged information has been disclosed to the government, attempting to undo that disclosure can be substantially more difficult.

Can You File a Motion to Quash a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena?

Yes, under appropriate circumstances.

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)(2) provides that a court may quash or modify a subpoena if compliance would be unreasonable or oppressive.

Depending on the facts, potential challenges may involve issues such as:

• Overbreadth;
• Undue burden;
• Privilege;
• Fifth Amendment concerns;
• Requests extending beyond an appropriate investigative purpose; or
• Other legal defects affecting the subpoena.

A motion to quash is not appropriate merely because complying with the subpoena is inconvenient or because the recipient would prefer not to provide the requested evidence.

Grand juries have broad investigative authority.

But broad authority is not unlimited authority.

In some cases, the more practical solution is not litigation at all. Defense counsel may be able to negotiate directly with the prosecutor to narrow the requested categories, modify search terms, establish procedures for privileged material, or obtain additional time to respond.

What Should You Do With Documents After Receiving a Subpoena?

Preserve them.

Do not delete emails, destroy documents, erase text messages, modify files, dispose of devices, or instruct employees or other people to remove potentially relevant information.

A subpoena recipient should ordinarily preserve potentially responsive information while counsel determines what ultimately must be produced.

This can include electronically stored information on:

• Cell phones;
• Computers;
• Email accounts;
• Cloud storage;
• Messaging applications;
• Business servers; and
• Backup systems.

Destroying or concealing evidence after learning of a federal investigation can create problems far more serious than the original subpoena.

What If the Deadline Is Too Soon?

Do not simply miss it.

Contact us immediately.

Depending on the circumstances, we may be able to contact the Assistant United States Attorney and request additional time to respond, particularly when the subpoena seeks a substantial amount of electronically stored information or requires privilege review.

But an extension should be confirmed with the government. A subpoena recipient should not simply assume that additional time is available.

Does Receiving a Grand Jury Subpoena Mean I Am Going to Be Indicted?

No.

Grand juries issue subpoenas to many people and entities that are never charged with crimes.

But receiving a subpoena can be an important opportunity to determine what is happening before charges are filed..

That pre-indictment period can be one of the most important stages of a federal criminal case.

If you have received a federal grand jury subpoena, the safest time to evaluate your options is before you produce documents or testify—not afterward.

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. represents individuals and businesses in federal criminal investigations, grand jury matters, white-collar cases, healthcare investigations, fraud investigations, and other federal criminal matters.

.

The Whistleblower on Trial: The History and Uncertain Future of Zafirov v. Florida Medical

For over a century, the False Claims Act (FCA) has been the federal government’s most potent weapon against fraud. At its core sits the qui tam provision—a mechanism allowing private citizens (called “relators”) to sue companies on behalf of the government and pocket a portion of the recovered funds.

But a case in Florida has put the entire multi-billion-dollar whistleblower framework on trial. The case is United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC. After lower-court rulings and tense appellate arguments in December 2025, the legal and healthcare worlds are anxiously awaiting to see how the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals will rule.

The History of this False Claims Act suit: How We Got Here

The story began when Dr. Clarissa Zafirov, a physician in Florida, alleged that her employer and other defendants engaged in systemic Medicare fraud by misrepresenting patient conditions to pad federal reimbursements. The U.S. government chose not to intervene, leaving Dr. Zafirov to spearhead the complex litigation herself.

The defendants, however, didn’t just fight the fraud allegations; they attacked the constitutional foundation of the lawsuit. In September 2024, U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle dropped a bombshell by dismissing Zafirov’s suit. She didn’t rule on whether fraud occurred. Instead, she ruled that the False Claims Act’s qui tam provisions are unconstitutional.

The Article II Battleground

Judge Mizelle’s ruling hinged on the Appointments Clause of Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
Is a Whistleblower an "Officer of the United States"? ├── YES ──> Must be appointed by the President, Courts, or Dept. Head. (FCA Fails) └── NO ──> Private citizen pursuing a claim. (FCA Succeeds)

Judge Mizelle argued that because a relator wields significant executive power—conducting civil litigation in the name of the United States to vindicate public rights—they act as an “Officer of the United States.” Because Dr. Zafirov appointed herself to this role by simply filing a complaint, her status bypassed constitutional appointment protocols. “Zafirov has determined which defendants to sue, which theories to raise, which motions to file, and which evidence to obtain… Yet no one… appointed Zafirov to the office of relator. Instead… Zafirov appointed herself. This she may not do.”
— Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle

While decades of judicial precedent across the country had uniformly rejected this argument, Judge Mizelle’s ruling breathed real life into a legal theory previously sparked by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas in a 2023 dissenting opinion (U.S. ex rel. Polansky), where Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett also expressed interest in reviewing the issue.

The Eleventh Circuit Showdown

The Department of Justice and Dr. Zafirov promptly appealed, leading to highly anticipated oral arguments before a three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit on December 12, 2025.

The panel – Circuit Judges Elizabeth L. Branch, Robert J. Luck, and Senior District Judge Federico A. Moreno—focused intensely on the concept of control.

The arguments were mainly over two competing perspectives:

1. The Government’s and Relator’s Defense
The DOJ shifted its strategy slightly at oral arguments, focusing heavily on the “continuing position” prong of officer status. They argued that an “officer” must occupy a permanent, continuous government seat (like the Secretary of State). A whistleblower is a temporary, self-interested private actor whose role dissolves when the case ends. Furthermore, they argued the government retains ultimate control because it can step in and dismiss or settle the case at any time.

2. The Defense and Amici Pushback
Attorneys for Florida Medical and supporting business groups argued that when the government declines to intervene (which occurs in roughly 80% of FCA cases), the relator is entirely “in the driver’s seat.” They exercise massive, unaccountable federal authority to issue subpoenas, freeze corporate assets, and force massive settlements without answering to the President.

Prediction: How Might the 11th Circuit Rule?

Predicting appellate outcomes is tricky, but the panel’s questioning in December 2025 offered some clues. The judges did not treat the constitutionality of the FCA as a settled matter. They repeatedly pressed the DOJ on why Justice Thomas’s strict separation-of-powers logic was wrong.

The court essentially faces three paths:

1) Reverse the Dismissal (Uphold the FCA)
The court aligns with decades of historical practice and other circuits (like the Sixth Circuit’s January 2026 ruling), finding that private bounty-hunters are not public “officers.” Therefore it would remain business as usual. Whistleblower cases proceed normally in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama.

2) Affirm the Dismissal (Strike down Qui Tam)
The panel adopts Judge Mizelle’s and Justice Thomas’s strict textualist view that prosecuting public fraud is an exclusively executive function that cannot be outsourced to unappointed citizens. This would create Immediate chaos. Hundreds of pending qui tam cases in the Southeast would face dismissal, crippling a primary source of federal fraud recovery.

3) The Middle Ground (Narrow Procedural Fix)
The court rules that qui tam actions are only unconstitutional if the government completely declines to intervene, or suggests a fix where the DOJ must sign off on major litigation steps. A logistical headache for the DOJ, which would be forced to actively micromanage cases it initially wanted no part of.

The Verdict on the Horizon

Given the conservative, textualist leanings of the Eleventh Circuit panel, an affirmance (ruling the qui tam provision unconstitutional) is a highly distinct possibility. The judges seemed genuinely troubled by the lack of day-to-day executive oversight in declined whistle-blower lawsuits.

However, regardless of whether the Eleventh Circuit upholds the law or strikes it down, Zafirov is on a fast track to the ultimate destination. Because a stark circuit split is opening up between courts upholding the False Claims Act and those questioning it, this case is highly likely to end up before the U.S. Supreme Court, where the future of American whistleblower law will be decided once and for all.

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.

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.

The False Claims Act (FCA), also known as the “Lincoln Law,” is a federal law that imposes liability on individuals and companies who defraud governmental programs. This includes submitting false invoices, making false statements to get paid by the government, or avoiding payment of money owed to the government. The law was originally enacted during the Civil War to combat fraud by government contractors supplying the Union Army with substandard goods; however, the FCA was strengthened in 1986, when Congress increased incentives for whistleblowers to file lawsuits alleging false claims on behalf of the government.

Under the FCA, individuals or entities can be held liable for knowingly submitting false or fraudulent claims for payment to the government. The FCA allows private individuals, known as “whistleblowers” or “relators,” to file lawsuits on behalf of the government and share in any monetary recovery. These lawsuits are known as qui tam actions. If the government intervenes in the lawsuit and recovers funds, the whistleblower is typically entitled to receive a portion of the recovered amount, often ranging from 15% to 30%. In fiscal year 2023, whistleblowers filed 712 qui tam suits, and this past year the Justice Department reported settlements and judgments exceeding $2.3 billion in these and earlier-filed suits.

The False Claims Act has been instrumental in recovering billions of dollars for the government and deterring fraudulent conduct in government programs and contracts. It is one of the most powerful tools available for combating fraud against the government in the United States. Healthcare fraud has remained a leading source of FCA claims in recent years.

The Justice Department has litigated several significant cases involving the Medicare Advantage program. The Cigna Group settled for $172 million to resolve allegations that it knowingly submitted and failed to withdraw inaccurate and untruthful diagnosis codes for its Medicare Advantage Plan enrollees to increase its payments from Medicare. Martin’s Point agreed to pay more than $22 million following allegations that it violated the FCA by submitting inaccurate diagnosis codes for its Medicare Advantage Plan enrollees. Other cases related to Medicare Advantage matters continue to be litigated including actions against the UnitedHealth Group, Independent Health Corporation, Elevance Health (formerly Anthem), and Kaiser Permanente.

In deciding whether to terminate probation early, the Court will consider the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a). The 3553(a) factors include: the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history and characteristics of the defendant, the need for the sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense, the need for the sentence imposed to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct, the need for the sentence imposed to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant, the need for the sentence imposed to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment, and the need for the sentence imposed to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct.

After a defendant files a petition to have their sentence modified or terminated, it is the Judge’s decision whether probation should be terminated early. This judge will often be the same judge that imposed the original sentence. In most cases, judges deny requests; however, certain factors can strengthen a defendant’s request for early termination of probation. Overall, to successfully terminate a term of probation, the defendant must show that they have earned it through good conduct, and it would be in the interests of justice.

Judges may consider the following factors in their determination of a request to terminate or modify the term of probation:

• Whether your probation officer and the Prosecutor support your request;
• The nature and seriousness of the crime you were convicted of;
• Your criminal history and/or mental illness history;
• Whether the judge believes you are a threat to the public;
• Whether the judge believes you have been sufficiently punished;
• Whether you have completed any substance abuse treatment or rehabilitation programs;
• How your sentence compares to the federal sentencing guidelines recommended sentence;
• U. S. Sentencing Commission policy statements;
• Whether you’ve paid restitution to the victims.

Your probation officer will also ask you about how you’ve accepted responsibility for breaking the law. It is important to be aware that, in the federal system, defendants who do not clearly accept responsibility for their actions can receive harsher sentences than those who admit they broke the law, follow the rules of the Court, and continue to follow the law.

Your probation officer will also ask you about the assets you and your spouse own, any cash you have, and any debts you owe. This is because in some cases the Court is required to determine if you have the ability to pay a fine or, in some cases, restitution to victims. Restitution can be mandatory, and the financial information you provide will be used to determine monthly payments. Because of this, and because your officer will investigate and confirm the information you provide, it is very important you give truthful information about your financial situation. You may also be asked to provide documents such as, but not limited to, statements, deeds, and titles, which support the information you provide verbally, and on a variety of financial forms. Finally, you will be asked to sign a variety of release forms that will allow your officer to access government records, as well as educational, medical, psychiatric, and employment information about you.

After the PSR interview, Probation will conduct their independent investigation by reviewing all relevant records and reports from investigating agencies and conducting further interviews. All of this information, along with any corrections or objections, will be compiled in the final PSR.

After a defendant pleads guilty (or is found guilty by a jury or judge), the judge will order the probation officer to create the PSR. The assigned probation officer will conduct a PSR interview with the defendant as well as an independent investigation into the offense to gather information.

Once the initial PSR is complete, the report is sent to your attorney, the Government’s attorney, and the Court. Once disclosed, your attorney is required to review the report with you. If you see any information that is incorrect, or if you disagree with how the guidelines are computed, your attorney can file objections to the PSR. The final PSR will make any corrections and note any objections in the PSR Addendum. If there are still any unresolved objections by the day you are sentenced, the Judge will resolve any disagreements before pronouncing your final sentence.

A PSR has six major parts:

• Part A shows everything that has happened in your case so far, from your arrest to when you are scheduled to be sentenced; discusses what happened during the offense(s) of conviction; the impact of the offense on the victim(s); your acceptance of responsibility for the offense; and how the Federal Sentencing Guidelines apply to the facts of your case.
• Part B lists and describes any arrests and convictions you have had before now, and scores them to obtain your Criminal History score.
• Part C is all about you. This section discusses your personal background and family information, your financial status, and any information you or your family, friends, or employers want the judge to know about you.
• Part D lays out the guideline range computed by the probation officer and the minimum and maximum punishments required by the law. It is important to remember the probation officer does not decide your sentence. Only the judge can decide your sentence and resolve any disagreements about your case.
• Parts E and F discuss identified offense or personal history factors the judge may use to give you a lower or higher sentence than the guideline range stated in Part D of the PSR.

Wire Fraud is a serious white-collar crime and is defined under 18 USC §1343 and states:

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. If the violation occurs in relation to, or involving any benefit authorized, transported, transmitted, transferred, disbursed, or paid in connection with, a presidentially declared major disaster or emergency (as those terms are defined in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), or affects a financial institution, such person shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both. 18 U.S.C.A. § 1343.

Generally, the 11th Circuit has stated that mail or wire fraud occurs when (1) a person intentionally participates in scheme to defraud another (2) of money or property and (3) uses mails or wires in furtherance of that scheme. Cesnik v. Edgewood Baptist Church, 88 F.3d 902 (11th Cir. 1996).

The Department of Justice however does have its own internal limitations for prosecution. According to Justice Manual 9-43.100 (Prosecution Policy Relating to Mail and Wire Fraud), “Prosecutions of fraud ordinarily should not be undertaken if the scheme employed consists of some isolated transactions between individuals, involving minor loss to the victims, in which case the parties should be left to settle their differences by civil or criminal litigation in the state courts. Serious consideration, however, should be given to the prosecution of any scheme which in its nature is directed to defrauding a class of persons, or the general public, with a substantial pattern of conduct.”

Alternatives to prosecutions can also come in the form of Pretrial Diversion (PTD). PTD programs divert certain offenders from traditional criminal justice processing into alternative systems of supervision and services. Individuals who successfully complete a PTD program may qualify for a range of case outcomes, including the declination of charges, dismissal or reduction of charges, or a more favorable recommendation at sentencing.

Navigating serious crimes like these can be the toughest thing you have ever done. Don’t do it alone. Contact our team today for more information about how we can protect your rights.

It’s a Federal crime to commit aggravated identity theft.

The Defendant can be found guilty of aggravated identity theft only if all the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) the Defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used another person’s [means of identification] [identification documents];

(2) without lawful authority; and

(3) during and in relation to [the eligible felony alleged in the indictment].

[A “means of identification” is any name or number used, alone or together with any other information, to identify a specific person, including a name, social security number, date of birth, officially issued driver’s license or identification number, alien registration number, passport number, employer or taxpayer identification number, or electronic identification number or routing code. It can also include a fingerprint, voice print or other biometric data.]

[An “identification document” is a document made or issued by or for the United States Government, a state or foreign government or political subdivision.]

The Government must prove that the Defendant knew that the [means of identification] [identification documents], in fact, belonged to another actual person, [living or dead,] and not a fictitious person.

The Government must prove that the Defendant knowingly transferred, possessed, or used another person’s identity “without lawful authority.” The Government does not have to prove that the Defendant stole the [means of identification] [identification documents]. The Government is required to prove the Defendant transferred, possessed, or used the other person’s [means of identification] [identification documents] for an unlawful or illegitimate purpose.

The Government also must prove that the [means of identification] [identification document] was possessed “during and in relation to” the crime alleged in the indictment. The phrase “during and in relation to” means that there must be a firm connection between the Defendant, the [means of identification] [identification documents], and the crime alleged in the indictment. The [means of identification] [identification documents] must have helped with some important function or purpose of the crime, and not simply have been there accidentally or coincidentally. The [means of identification] [identification documents] at least must facilitate, or have the potential of facilitating, the crime alleged in the indictment.

We at Conaway & Strickler, PC know how to combat these type of charges. Please feel free to access our blog for other entries here

Please contact us to learn more should you be facing criminal charges.

RDAP consists of 3 intensive phases, totaling over 500-hours of voluntary individual and group treatment, and it is about 9-12 months long. This program offers prisoners to live in a modified prosocial community within the prison, separate from the general population. They split their day in half with vocational, work, or school activities and the other half in treatment/programs. Prisoners must meet specific requirements to be considered for this program, and space is often limited. The prisoner must have at least 24 months remaining in their sentence to complete the program.

Since some inmates may have less than a 24-month sentence, the FBOP also offers a Non-Residential Drug Abuse Program (NRDAP), where prisoners can participate in 12-24 weeks of Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment. This treatment consists of skill-building within communication, rational thinking, and institution adjustment. NRDAP is often offered in a group setting and is more accessible to prisoners because of the less strict qualifications. NRDAP differs from RDAP because offenders may join this program if they have short sentences, are not eligible for RDAP, or awaiting availability.

The key benefit other than treatment is that those inmates who successfully complete either program may be eligible for a maximum pre-release time in a residential re-entry center, such as a halfway house, where treatment continues thus shortening the actual time incarcerated.

For more information, please click here or feel free to access our blog or contact Conaway & Strickler, PC to discuss this in more detail.

With all of this going on, the US Attorney’s office increased its prosecutions of individuals of white collar crimes in the year 2021. White collar charges like fraud, theft, corruption, bribery, environmental crime, tax fraud, health care fraud, procurement fraud, money laundering, PPP loan fraud, etc will continue to get more attention from the Department of Justice.

What does this mean? It means that investigations of any sort need to be taken seriously and that you should contact a lawyer immediately if any wrongdoing is alleged.

Conaway & Strickler, PC has a long history of handling fraud cases of all varieties and is well equipped at fighting the DOJ in their overzealous prosecutions. Please feel free to contact us so that we can help you avoid future headaches.

Indeed, according to the Cornell Law School, destroying a mailbox is a federal offense that is punishable by either fines or imprisonment of up to three years (or a combination of both). Per the US Postal Service, the fines associated with this defense can be up to $250,000. Not only is damaging, defacing or destroying a mailbox punishable under this statute, but so too is entering or breaking open a mailbox (that is not yours) to gain access to others’ mail.

You have probably seen or heard of stories of rowdy teens or young adults hitting mailboxes with baseball bats or putting firecrackers inside of them. You likely dismiss these as childish pranks, yet the damage that they cause and the impact that such an act can have is very real. Thus, it is not an acceptable defense to a charge of destroying a mailbox that you or someone you know was simply trying to play a joke.

Gaining entry to another’s mailbox presents more of a grey area, however. If, say, you believed you had another’s permission to get their mail, then it could be argued that there was no intent to damage or defraud. More information on answering to alleged federal crimes like damaging a mailbox can be found here on our site.