federal criminal attorney - Conaway & Strickler

DOJ Announces $2 Billion Healthcare Fraud Takedown: What Physicians and Healthcare Providers Need to Know

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sat, 24 Oct 2026 13:30:50 GMT

Federal prosecutors charge 15 defendants, including six medical professionals, in sweeping healthcare fraud enforcement action.

The Department of Justice announced on October 22, 2026, that federal prosecutors in Los Angeles charged 15 defendants, including six medical professionals, in a sweeping healthcare fraud takedown involving approximately $2 billion in allegedly fraudulent healthcare claims.

The cases involve allegations of medically unnecessary procedures, fraudulent hospice certifications, sham substance abuse treatment programs, illegal patient referrals, and improper Medicare billing.

Although the charges were brought in California, the announcement has significant implications for physicians, medical directors, healthcare business owners, and other medical professionals throughout Georgia.

For healthcare providers, the announcement reinforces an important reality: Federal healthcare fraud investigations increasingly focus not only on billing practices but also on medical necessity, physician certifications, patient referrals, and the business relationships underlying healthcare services.

What Did the DOJ Announce?

According to the October 22, 2026, announcement from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, the cases include several significant alleged fraud schemes:

More than $1.6 billion in claims involving purported substance abuse treatment programs that allegedly recruited vulnerable patients and billed private insurers for sham treatment.
Approximately $135 million in alleged Medicare fraud involving unnecessary invasive arterial procedures.
More than $138 million in alleged fraudulent hospice claims involving patients who allegedly were not terminally ill.
A separate indictment involving an alleged $270 million Medi-Cal prescription fraud scheme.

The allegations encompass multiple healthcare sectors and involve physicians, medical professionals, facility operators, and others accused of participating in fraudulent billing arrangements.

Physicians Under Scrutiny for Medically Unnecessary Procedures

One of the most significant cases involves a cardiothoracic surgeon and a chiropractor accused of participating in a scheme to bill Medicare for medically unnecessary arterial procedures.

Federal prosecutors allege that patients underwent atherectomies—procedures designed to remove plaque from arteries—even when the patients did not have the underlying arterial disease that would justify treatment. The government further alleges that the defendants submitted claims under the names of medical providers who had not actually performed the procedures and offered improper inducements to Medicare beneficiaries.

According to the DOJ, investigators identified the case through data analytics showing that one physician was an extreme outlier in Medicare billing for atherectomy procedures.

Why This Matters for Georgia Physicians

Federal investigators routinely examine Medicare and Medicaid billing data to identify providers whose practices differ significantly from those of their peers. They use this data from these analytical reports to draw conclusions that are not always true. But, it does trigger additional scrutiny.

A physician may legitimately perform more procedures than peers because of specialization, patient population, referral patterns, or other medically appropriate circumstances. The distinction between aggressive billing, documentation deficiencies, medical disagreement, and intentional fraud can be critical in a federal criminal investigation.

The government must establish the elements of the charged offense, including the required fraudulent intent. Hiring an experienced healthcare fraud defense lawyer early on in an investigation is very important.

Hospice Fraud Investigations: The Risks for Medical Directors and Certifying Physicians

The DOJ announcement also highlights federal scrutiny of hospice providers and physicians who certify patients as terminally ill.

Under Medicare’s hospice benefit, eligibility generally requires physician certification that a patient has a life expectancy of six months or less if the illness runs its normal course.

Federal prosecutors allege that certain defendants enrolled patients who were not terminally ill and submitted claims for hospice services that were unnecessary or not provided.

One case involves a physician accused of signing certifications of terminal illness for beneficiaries who allegedly did not qualify for hospice care and, in some instances, did not know they had been enrolled.

Can a Physician Face Criminal Charges for Signing Hospice Certifications?

Potentially, yes.

A physician who knowingly falsifies a certification to facilitate fraudulent Medicare reimbursement may face criminal liability. But the legal analysis is not as simple as determining whether a patient ultimately survived longer than six months. Hospice eligibility involves a prospective clinical judgment based on the patient’s condition at the time of certification.

A patient living beyond the anticipated prognosis does not, by itself, establish that the original certification was fraudulent.

In defending physicians accused of hospice fraud, important questions may include:

What clinical information was available when the certification was signed?
Did the physician personally evaluate the patient or rely on information supplied by other healthcare professionals?
Were the medical records consistent with the physician’s judgment?
Did the physician know that any supporting documentation was inaccurate?
Was the physician involved in the hospice company’s billing, ownership, or financial operations?

These distinctions may determine whether the evidence supports a criminal fraud allegation or instead reflects a disagreement about medical judgment, documentation, or regulatory compliance.

Substance Abuse Treatment Fraud and Illegal Patient Referrals

The largest alleged scheme announced by the DOJ Health care Fraud Section involves more than $1.6 billion in claims connected to purported substance abuse treatment programs.

Prosecutors allege that operators and recruiters targeted vulnerable individuals, offered financial and other inducements, and arranged for patients to receive treatment that was unnecessary, inadequate, or never provided.

The indictment also includes charges under the Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act (EKRA).

EKRA generally prohibits knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving remuneration to induce referrals to recovery homes, clinical treatment facilities, or laboratories, subject to statutory exceptions. Unlike the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which generally focuses on federal healthcare program business, EKRA can reach arrangements involving private insurance.

That distinction is particularly important for substance abuse treatment centers, laboratories, and other covered healthcare businesses.

Why EKRA Matters for Healthcare Businesses

Healthcare providers and treatment facilities should carefully evaluate financial arrangements involving patient recruiters, marketing companies, referral sources, and outside contractors.

Depending on the circumstances, compensation arrangements tied to patient referrals or the volume of reimbursable services can create significant criminal exposure.

Not every marketing arrangement or referral relationship is illegal. The structure of the compensation, the services actually provided, the applicable statutory exceptions, and the parties’ intent all matter.

Federal Healthcare Fraud Investigations Are Increasingly Data-Driven

Perhaps one of the most important aspects of the DOJ announcement is its express reliance on data analytics.

Federal investigators can analyze claims data to identify patterns involving procedure frequency, billing volume, provider relationships, patient characteristics, and reimbursement activity.

Those patterns may prompt investigations long before a physician or healthcare business learns that federal authorities are examining its practices.

A healthcare fraud investigation may involve multiple agencies, including the FBI, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG), and IRS Criminal Investigation.

Investigators may seek medical records, billing data, financial documents, employee communications, and evidence concerning the provider’s knowledge and intent.

Healthcare professionals should understand that an investigation can begin with billing data rather than a patient complaint or whistleblower allegation. At Conaway & Strickler, PC, we have forensic experts ready to assist in your defense.

What Should a Georgia Physician Do if Contacted by Federal Investigators?

A physician or healthcare business owner who receives a federal grand jury subpoena, search warrant, or request for an interview should contact us immediately.

Even when the provider believes the underlying billing or medical decisions were appropriate, statements made during an investigation may have significant consequences.

Counsel can evaluate the nature of the investigation, determine whether the provider is a witness, subject, or target, address privilege and document-production issues, and help protect the provider’s rights.

Relevant records should be preserved. Providers should not alter medical records, delete communications, or attempt to influence witnesses.

The Difference Between Healthcare Fraud and Medical Judgment

One of the most important questions in any federal healthcare fraud prosecution is whether the government can establish that the defendant knowingly and willfully participated in a fraudulent scheme.

Federal healthcare regulations are complex. Billing errors, coding disputes, incomplete documentation, and disagreements about medical necessity do not automatically constitute criminal fraud.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 1347, the federal healthcare fraud statute requires proof of a knowing and willful scheme to defraud a healthcare benefit program, or to obtain its money or property through materially false or fraudulent representations, in connection with healthcare benefits, items, or services.

The government’s burden is not satisfied merely by showing that a physician made a mistake or that an insurer later disagreed with a treatment decision.

The particular facts, medical evidence, communications, and evidence of intent are essential.

Federal Healthcare Fraud Defense Attorneys in Atlanta, Georgia

The DOJ’s October 22, 2026, healthcare fraud takedown demonstrates the breadth of federal enforcement activity targeting physicians, healthcare executives, treatment facilities, and medical businesses.

For Georgia healthcare professionals, allegations involving Medicare billing, medical necessity, hospice certifications, patient referrals, or healthcare business relationships can carry substantial criminal and professional consequences.

Conaway & Strickler, PC represents individuals and professionals facing federal criminal investigations and prosecutions, including matters involving healthcare fraud and complex financial allegations.

If you are a physician, medical director, healthcare executive, or other medical professional facing a federal investigation, obtaining experienced legal representation early can be critical to protecting your rights and professional future. Contact Conaway & Strickler, PC, at 404 816 5000. We are here to help.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

When Does a Business Dispute Become Federal Wire Fraud?

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sun, 18 Oct 2026 18:15:10 GMT

A failed business deal is not necessarily fraud. A broken promise is not automatically a federal crime. And losing an investor’s money does not, by itself, mean someone committed wire fraud. Yet business disagreements that begin as civil disputes can sometimes escalate into federal criminal investigations, exposing business owners, executives, entrepreneurs, and other professionals to serious criminal charges.

Consider these common scenarios: Two business partners have a falling out. One accuses the other of misusing company funds. Or an investor claims that money was spent differently than promised. Or a customer alleges that a company misrepresented its financial condition. What began as a disagreement over contracts, compensation, or business decisions suddenly becomes an accusation of criminal fraud.

In some cases, the FBI becomes involved.

The distinction between a civil business dispute and federal wire fraud is critical. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, a federal wire fraud conviction can carry up to 20 years in prison, with a higher statutory maximum in certain circumstances.

For individuals facing these allegations, understanding where civil liability ends and federal criminal exposure begins is essential.

What Is Federal Wire Fraud?

Federal wire fraud is a criminal offense involving a scheme to defraud that uses interstate or foreign wire communications in furtherance of that scheme.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 1343, prosecutors generally must establish:

A scheme to defraud or obtain money or property through materially false or fraudulent representations, promises, or omissions.
The defendant’s knowing participation in the scheme with intent to defraud.
The use, or reasonably foreseeable use, of interstate or foreign wire communications to further the scheme.

The electronic communication does not necessarily have to contain a fraudulent statement itself.

Emails, telephone calls, electronic banking transactions, and other electronic communications may satisfy the wire requirement when the statutory jurisdictional and other elements are met.

But the existence of an email, electronic payment, or failed business transaction does not automatically establish federal wire fraud.

The central issue is whether the government can prove a fraudulent scheme and the defendant’s criminal intent—not merely that someone lost money or believes they were treated unfairly.

Breach of Contract Versus Federal Wire Fraud: What Is the Difference?

One of the most important distinctions in federal white-collar criminal defense is the difference between failing to fulfill a contractual obligation and entering into a transaction with fraudulent intent.

A breach of contract generally occurs when one party fails to perform an obligation under an agreement.

For example:

A business fails to repay a loan on time.
A contractor does not complete a project.
A company cannot deliver products as promised.
A business partner disputes how company profits should be distributed.
An investment fails to generate the anticipated return.

These circumstances may create civil liability. They do not necessarily establish a federal crime.

Wire fraud, by contrast, requires proof of a fraudulent scheme involving the requisite intent.

Consider two different situations.

Scenario One: A Business Deal Goes Bad

An entrepreneur raises $500,000 from investors to launch a new company. The entrepreneur genuinely intends to develop the business, uses the funds for legitimate operating expenses, but ultimately fails to make the company profitable.

The investors lose their money.

Although the investors may have civil claims depending on the circumstances, the failure of the business alone does not establish federal wire fraud.

Scenario Two: A Business Deal Built on Deception

An entrepreneur solicits $500,000 from investors while knowingly fabricating financial statements, inventing nonexistent customers, and falsely claiming that the company has secured major contracts.

The entrepreneur uses these representations to induce investors to transfer their money.

Those facts may support a federal wire fraud prosecution because the government could allege that the defendant intentionally used material deception to obtain money.

The distinction is not simply whether the investment succeeded or failed. It is whether the government can prove the elements of a fraudulent scheme.

Can a Business Partner Accuse You of Federal Wire Fraud?

Yes. Allegations of federal wire fraud sometimes arise from disputes between business partners, shareholders, investors, or corporate executives.

These cases can be particularly complicated because business relationships often involve informal agreements, overlapping responsibilities, disputed compensation arrangements, and disagreements about financial authority.

A business partner may allege that another partner:

Diverted company revenue.
Made unauthorized withdrawals.
Misrepresented the company’s financial condition.
Concealed business transactions.
Used investor funds for unauthorized purposes.
Submitted misleading financial statements.

However, an accusation does not establish that a federal crime occurred.

In closely held businesses, the authority to withdraw money, receive compensation, reimburse expenses, or make financial decisions may be governed by operating agreements, corporate documents, historical practices, or other evidence.

Experienced federal criminal defense attorneys like Conaway & Strickler, PC examines whether the disputed transactions were authorized, whether the accused had a legitimate ownership interest, and whether the evidence supports an inference of fraudulent intent.

A disagreement about who was entitled to company money is not automatically proof that someone committed federal wire fraud.

Can You Be Charged with Wire Fraud If Nobody Lost Money?

Yes. This is an especially important development in federal fraud law.

In May 2025, the United States Supreme Court decided Kousisis v. United States, holding that a defendant who fraudulently induces another party to enter into a transaction may be convicted of federal wire fraud even when the defendant did not intend to cause economic loss.

The case involved government contracts obtained through materially false representations about compliance with disadvantaged-business participation requirements.

The defendants argued that the government received the services it paid for and therefore suffered no economic loss.

The Supreme Court rejected the argument that an intent to cause net financial loss was required.

The decision reinforces an important principle: A defendant may face federal wire fraud liability even when the alleged victim received something of value in return.

For business owners and executives, this means that completing a contract, repaying an investor, or delivering a product does not necessarily eliminate criminal exposure if prosecutors can establish that money or property was obtained through a fraudulent scheme.

At the same time, the government must still prove the required elements of wire fraud, including material deception, criminal intent, and the use of qualifying wire communications.

Does Every Misrepresentation in a Business Deal Constitute Wire Fraud?

No.

Business negotiations frequently involve projections, estimates, opinions, and expectations about future performance.

A company may forecast revenue that never materializes. An entrepreneur may believe that financing will be secured but ultimately fail to obtain it. A business executive may make an overly optimistic prediction about future profitability.

Those statements are not necessarily fraudulent simply because events unfold differently than expected.

The analysis may turn on whether the representation concerned an existing fact, whether it was materially false or misleading, what the defendant knew at the time, and whether there was intent to defraud.

For example, there is an important distinction between predicting that a company will earn $5 million next year and knowingly presenting fabricated financial records showing that the company already earned $5 million.

The first may be an optimistic business projection. The second may constitute evidence of intentional deception.

Context matters, and prosecutors cannot establish criminal intent solely through hindsight.

The Supreme Court Has Also Limited the Reach of Federal Fraud Laws

Although federal wire fraud is a powerful prosecutorial tool, the Supreme Court has cautioned against interpreting the statute so broadly that ordinary business misconduct automatically becomes a federal crime.

In Ciminelli v. United States, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected the government’s use of a theory that treated the deprivation of economically valuable information needed to make business decisions as a deprivation of property.

The Court held that the federal wire fraud statute protects traditional property interests and does not broadly criminalize every dishonest practice affecting economic decision-making.

The decision is significant because it reinforces limits on federal prosecutors’ ability to transform conduct traditionally addressed through state contract or tort law into federal property fraud.

Read together, Ciminelli and Kousisis illustrate an important distinction.

Federal prosecutors cannot rely solely on the theory that a person was deprived of information necessary to make an informed economic decision. But when material deception is used to obtain money or property, the government need not establish an intent to cause net economic loss.

For individuals accused of business-related wire fraud, the precise nature of the alleged misrepresentation and the property the government claims was targeted can be critical defense issues.

How Do Business Disputes Become FBI Investigations?

A federal investigation may begin when a disgruntled investor, former employee, business partner, or other individual reports suspected financial misconduct.

Other investigations may originate from civil litigation, internal audits, financial institutions, regulatory agencies, or referrals to federal law enforcement.

Once investigators become involved, they may seek financial records, emails, text messages, bank statements, contracts, and communications between the parties.

They may also interview employees, accountants, investors, and business associates.

In some cases, investigators issue grand jury subpoenas for documents or testimony. In others, agents contact individuals directly and request voluntary interviews.

One of the challenges in these investigations is that the government may initially receive only one side of a complicated business dispute.

A former partner may characterize an authorized withdrawal as theft. An investor may describe an unsuccessful business strategy as intentional deception. An employee may misunderstand the purpose of a financial transaction.

That does not mean every allegation is unfounded. It does mean that a careful examination of the underlying business relationship and financial records is essential.

What Are the Potential Defenses to Federal Wire Fraud Charges?

Defending a federal wire fraud case often requires reconstructing the underlying business transactions and examining what the accused actually knew and intended when the relevant representations were made.

Depending on the circumstances, potential defenses may include:

Lack of Intent to Defraud

The defendant may have genuinely intended to perform contractual obligations, repay investors, complete a transaction, or operate a legitimate business.

Good-Faith Belief

Evidence that the defendant honestly believed representations were true, or believed the challenged conduct was authorized, may undermine the government’s allegations of fraudulent intent.

Absence of Material Misrepresentations

Not every inaccurate statement is material. The defense may challenge whether an alleged falsehood was capable of influencing the relevant economic decision.

Legitimate Business Purpose

Financial transfers or expenditures characterized as suspicious may have legitimate business explanations supported by contracts, accounting records, or historical practices.

Insufficient Evidence of a Fraudulent Scheme

A failed transaction, disputed contract, or financial loss does not alone establish the existence of a criminal scheme.

Challenges to the Government’s Legal Theory

The defense may examine whether the alleged scheme actually targeted money or property protected by the wire fraud statute and whether the government can establish the necessary interstate or foreign wire communication.

In complex cases, forensic accountants, financial experts, and other professionals may assist defense counsel in analyzing financial transactions and challenging the government’s interpretation of the evidence.

What Should You Do If a Business Dispute Turns Into a Criminal Investigation?

If a business partner, investor, or former employee threatens to report you to the FBI, it is important to understand that the dispute may have moved beyond an ordinary civil disagreement.

Do not assume that a federal investigation will disappear simply because you believe you acted appropriately.

Before responding to investigative inquiries, contact us immediately.

Avoid making substantive statements to federal investigators without first obtaining legal advice. Knowingly false statements to federal agents can create separate criminal exposure under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, even when the underlying allegations do not result in charges.

Do not delete emails, alter accounting records, destroy documents, or attempt to coordinate witness accounts.

Preserve potentially relevant records, including contracts, financial statements, correspondence, and documents showing the parties’ understanding of the transaction.

Early legal representation may allow defense counsel to assess the allegations, communicate with investigators when appropriate, identify favorable evidence, and address issues before an indictment is returned.

Frequently Asked Questions About Business Disputes and Federal Wire Fraud

Can I go to prison for failing to repay a business loan?

Simply failing to repay a loan generally does not establish federal wire fraud. However, obtaining loan proceeds through a scheme involving material misrepresentations and fraudulent intent may create criminal exposure.

Can an investor report me to the FBI because an investment failed?

Yes. Anyone can report suspected misconduct. However, an unsuccessful investment does not automatically establish fraud. The government must prove the elements of a criminal offense.

Can emails and text messages be used as evidence of wire fraud?

Yes. Electronic communications may be used to establish representations, knowledge, intent, or the use of interstate or foreign wires in furtherance of an alleged fraudulent scheme.

Can a civil lawsuit and a federal criminal investigation happen at the same time?

Yes. The same underlying business transactions may give rise to civil litigation and a criminal investigation. Parallel proceedings create important strategic concerns, particularly when testimony or discovery in the civil case could affect criminal exposure.

Does repaying the money eliminate wire fraud charges?

Not necessarily. Repayment may be relevant to the facts, intent, or sentencing, but it does not automatically eliminate criminal liability for an otherwise completed wire fraud offense.

Should I hire a federal criminal defense attorney before being charged?

Yes, particularly when there is a credible threat of a federal investigation or investigators have already made contact. Pre-indictment representation can be an important part of protecting your legal interests.

Accused of Federal Wire Fraud in Georgia? Contact Conaway & Strickler, PC

Business relationships can deteriorate. Investments can fail. Partners can disagree about money, management decisions, and contractual obligations.

But a business disagreement should not automatically be treated as evidence of federal criminal fraud.

When allegations of financial misconduct attract the attention of federal investigators, the consequences can be devastating. A federal wire fraud investigation can threaten a person’s freedom, professional reputation, financial security, and future.

At Conaway & Strickler, PC, our Atlanta federal criminal defense attorneys represent individuals facing federal criminal investigations and prosecutions, including allegations of wire fraud, financial fraud, conspiracy, and other white-collar offenses.

We understand the importance of examining the facts behind a business dispute, challenging unsupported allegations of criminal intent, and protecting our clients’ rights throughout the federal investigative and criminal justice process.

If a business dispute has escalated into allegations of federal wire fraud, or you believe you may be under investigation by the FBI or Department of Justice, contact Conaway & Strickler, PC to discuss your legal options.

This article is intended for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every case depends on its specific facts and applicable law.

Federal Grand Jury Subpoena: Do You Have to Comply?

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sat, 03 Oct 2026 21:51:43 GMT

Receiving a federal grand jury subpoena can be alarming. The subpoena may order you to appear before a federal grand jury, produce documents and electronic records, or both. It may also be the first indication that you, your business, or someone associated with you is involved in a federal criminal investigation.

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.

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.

Airport Searches*

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sat, 08 Aug 2026 13:02:45 GMT

Airport Searches: When are they Legal?

We all know that when we fly out from the airport, we have to have our luggage checked, and we’ll have to pose inside full-body scanners. Perhaps because of these measures, people may believe that their rights related to search and seizure do not apply in airports. Moreover, people may believe that, should they be stopped by federal or state police without cause, they have no way to fight for their rights.

The short answer is, that’s not right – you still have rights, even in an airport. That said, your rights are altered when in an airport. Here, we discuss a few of the nuances about airport searches, and offer some tips for travel.

What are the rules for airport searches?

Depending on where you are, the rules shift some for how airport searches work, exactly. That’s because while the United States Supreme Court has passed some rulings related to airport searches, many of the decisions which control airport searches are determined on the circuit level. Which circuit will apply depends on where the airport is.

No matter where you are, the United States Supreme Court has stated that your Fourth Amendment rights do still exist in airport, in cases such as Torres v. Puerto Rico and United States v. Place. However, every circuit has recognized that there are some exceptions which apply to airports, and these allow some of the searches you might already be used to; searches at airport security checkpoints (think TSA) are fine. Many circuits consider these “administrative searches” which put simply are searches which are okay if they are for specific purposes and remain limited in scope.

In the Eleventh Circuit – which is the Circuit that Georgia, Florida, and Alabama are in – the Court has stated that passengers in search areas, even if they withdraw their consent, can be searched. In United States v. Herzbrun, a man trying to board a plane, who voluntarily entered an airport security checkpoint, could not revoke his consent. In other words, if you go into a security line at the airport in the Eleventh Circuit, the airport is allowed to scan your things, and you cannot back out once you start.

That said, if police want to search your luggage, they will need probable cause – that is, they need reason to believe that a crime was committed, and evidence of that crime will be found in your luggage. Police may require a warrant to search your things, but they are allowed to detain your luggage to wait for a warrant once they have probable cause, seen in United States v. Place.

**What if you’re flying in, rather than out?**

This depends on where you are flying in from. If you are arriving from another place in the United States, your rights are the same as ever. However, if you fly in on an international flight, the rules apply to you as if you were crossing the border, which means the United States may have expanded search capabilities.

Once again, the exact laws which will apply depend on the circuit you are in. In the Eleventh Circuit, we use the rule established under United States v. Pulido, which asks whether there is statutory authority for Customs and Border Patrol to make a search, and then if there are constitutional concerns that apply to the search.

Right now, there is a case pending at the Eleventh Circuit asking whether or not Fourth Amendment protections apply to electronics when brought in internationally. (That case, if you are interested, is United States v. Tunick.) However, if you are flying in to somewhere in the Eleventh Circuit – again, Georgia, Florida, and Alabama – you may be automatically subject to a search of your phone even without suspicion, depending on the outcome of the case.

What can I do if I am getting ready to fly?

Take a couple easy steps when flying to ensure you minimize legal trouble:

Check airport rules, and check your luggage. Make sure you don’t bring anything that could get you into trouble. If you’re flying internationally, make sure you aren’t bringing contraband that could get you in trouble flying out or flying in – a few years ago, several Americans were detained in Turks & Caicos for having brought bullets. And currently, there is a Georgia man in the news who accidentally had ammunition in his bag in Jamaica.
Double check your electronics. Make sure there is nothing compromising on your electronics which could get you in trouble, should they be searched.
If you are stopped, remain courteous with airport authorities. Do not offer reasons they could use to detain or search you further.
If airport authorities seek to search your bags outside of a security checkpoint, do not consent to a search. Make sure your denial of consent is audible, and if possible, make sure there is a witness to the search. If police search your things without your consent, do not physically stop them. Simply make your refusal to consent known, make sure the search is witnessed, and take careful notes of the circumstances of the search.

What do I do if I’ve been illegally searched?

If you believe you have been illegally searched at an airport, contact us. Conaway & Strickler, PC may be able to help you determine if you have been illegally searched, and if there are any ways to vindicate your rights.

*Guest post written by Andrew Paul Smith, future Emory Law 2027 graduate

What is a Target Letter?

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Fri, 31 Jul 2026 14:20:35 GMT

What is a Target Letter?

A target letter is a letter from a federal prosecutor informing you that you are the focus of a federal criminal investigation. It indicates that the government possesses substantial evidence linking you to a federal offense and is considering charging you. A target letter will contain key information for your lawyer to assist you. It will have a description of the suspected offense, and the name of the AUSA handling the case. As soon as we are retained, we reach out to that AUSA to learn more about the situation.

If you receive a target letter, reach out for legal counsel as soon as possible.

What is the difference between Target, Subject and Witness?

A “target” is someone prosecutors are investigating for having allegedly committed a crime. A “witness”, on the other hand, is someone whom prosecutors believe may have information that may help investigators. However, they’re not currently suspected of wrongdoing.

Finally, a “subject” falls in the middle. You are within the scope of the investigation, and your conduct is definitely being investigated, but the government has not decided yet whether to bring charges against you.

These labels are fluid. Your status can change as the government investigates further. That is why you need a lawyer whether or not you initially fall in any of these three categories. Remember anything you say can and WILL be used against you.

What If I Receive a Target Letter from the Department of Justice?

Whether you’re a witness in a federal investigation or already a subject of a federal investigation, you need to know your rights before speaking with the government. We contact the AUSA immediately, as discussed above, but also we get a full understanding of the allegations against you so that we can begin our defense against any potential charges.

It is very important to hire legal counsel as soon as possible to protect your rights and assist you on the complex federal criminal justice system.

NOT GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sat, 18 Jul 2026 15:07:05 GMT

Not Guilty on all counts! Our team won a jury trial in the Middle District of Georgia this month. The jury came back with NOT GUILTYs on all counts. Our client was charged with Possession with Intent to Distribute and Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute narcotics. He was facing a 10 year mandatory minimum. He is home now and the case is dismissed.

Last month, in MDGA also, we secured a DISMISSAL on conspiracy to distribute fentanyl and methamphetamine. That case involved allegations of selling narcotics on the Darknet using an online payments of cryptocurrency.

Also last month, Meg Strickler gave a presentation in Lisbon, Portugal on a very important topic, The Importance of being aware when winning crosses the line: ethical boundaries in zealous advocacy.

Although we have had a busy couple of months, we are here to assist in any federal criminal defense needs. Contact us if you have any questions about a criminal defense matter.

Child Pornography Cases Explained

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Wed, 13 May 2026 21:00:17 GMT

Charges for child pornography (also known as CSAM) can range from possession, receipt, distribution, manufacturing, or other related charges in both the state or federal courts. Under the various statutes, the material can include online files, videos, print materials, photos, and other online materials. There are multiple ways in which a person can find themselves charged with child pornography which can include online file sharing, possession of child pornography, producing or distributing child pornography, online chatting between adults and minors, sexual exploitation of children or even sexting.

It is important to secure competent legal counsel as soon as possible to argue your case successfully.

There are many defenses that can be explored to get a positive outcome in your case. For example, the first one that comes to mind is entrapment. These days law enforcement often pose as other users in chat rooms or on the dark net. They pose as someone actively seeking CSAM. You may not have ever done anything illegal but for their persuading you to so. There are legal motions we can file that may be dispositive for your case. Remember, the government has become well versed in programs like BitTorrent, and can be on the dark net doing things illegal themselves all in their efforts to “combat crime.”

Additionally, when law enforcement comes to execute a search warrant for devices at your home or office, they must have a valid search warrant or everything they seized will be discarded and not used in the case against you. You need an experienced criminal defense lawyer to ensure law enforcement did not violate your Constitutional rights in executing the search warrant.

Sometimes, a download from a proper website can result in what is termed as an “accidental download”. We have experts ready to assist us in showing the government exactly what is and what is not on your devices and what is and what was purposely downloaded and accessed.

These are but some defenses that Conaway & Strickler, PC have successfully argued. Contact us to discuss your case in more depth. The consequences of a child pornography or CSAM (“Child Sexual Abuse Material”) conviction are severe and life-altering. And the collateral consequence of being on the sex offender registry can be devastating. We are here to help.

Digital Privacy – Fourth Amendment Case Law Update

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 12:53:32 GMT

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide if law enforcement needs to be more specific in their applications for search warrants for phones. At issue this week specifically is whether law enforcement can use broad geofence warrants to gather information about an alleged crime. In the case before the Supreme Court, the issue is whether the government can use cell phone location data at a crime scene without knowing who is holding the phone. They are gathering data based on the Global Positioning System, Bluetooth beacons, cell phone towers and local wi-fi networks.

To understand the specifics of this case, below we have quoted directly from the Petitioner’s Brief:

This case concerns the constitutionality of geofence warrants. For cell phone users to use certain services, their cell phones must continuously transmit their exact locations to their service providers. A geofence warrant allows law enforcement to obtain, from the service provider, the identities of users who were in the vicinity of a particular location at a particular time. In this case, law enforcement obtained, and served on Google, a geofence warrant seeking anonymized location data for every device within 150 meters of the location of a bank robbery within one hour of the robbery. After Google returned an initial list, law enforcement sought— without seeking an additional warrant—information about the movements of certain devices for a longer, two-hour period, and Google complied with that request as well. Then—again without seeking an additional warrant—law enforcement requested de anonymized subscriber information for three devices. One of those devices belonged to petitioner Okello Chatrie. Based on the evidence derived from the geofence warrant, petitioner was convicted of armed robbery.

The last time the Supreme Court wrestled with cell phone privacy issues was in Carpenter v. United States, 585 U.S. 296 (2018), which is a landmark United States Supreme Court case concerning the privacy of historical cell site location information. The Court held in that case that the government violates the Fourth Amendment when accessing historical cell phone Iocation records containing the physical locations of cellphones without a search warrant. That case, however, was after a suspect was identified, making it unlike the current case before the Supreme Court.

We receive terabytes of data in discovery for our cases. Motions to suppress can be filed for all of the data seized from search warrants of phones. We are cognizant of the ever changing landscape of Fourth Amendment case law. We ensure that law enforcement follows the appropriate procedures for every single case. Contact us now if you have a case you would like to discuss.

AI Generated CSAM – What to Know

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Sat, 14 Mar 2026 15:03:41 GMT

What is AI-Generated CSAM?

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.

Charged with a Federal Crime?

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Thu, 29 Jan 2026 16:08:46 GMT

Being charged with a federal crime can result from allegations of violating a federal criminal statute. All cases are prosecuted by the Department of Justice prosecuted by a “AUSA” – Assistant United States Attorney. All cases are investigated by agencies like the FBI, ATF, or DEA.

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/charged with a federal crime, 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.

How to Defend CSAM Cases

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Wed, 26 Nov 2025 03:02:11 GMT

I. How Does a Sex Crimes / CSAM Case Get to Law Enforcement?

The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) CyberTipline is a centralized reporting system for the online exploitation of children. Facebook/Meta, Google, Instagram, Snapchat, Yahoo, Microsoft, X, etc are required to report suspected CSAM detected on their platforms. These providers make reports of suspected online sex crimes issues and NCMEC reviews each report, and then forwards it to law enforcement for investigation. The report typically includes a description of the images, cryptographic hash values assigned to each file, and the Internet Protocol (IP) address linked to the account in question.

Cases can also occur when computer repair technicians encounter suspected CSAM on a device, or if a family member or peer sees something and informs law enforcement. Additionally, if an allegation of child molestation is made against a suspect, that suspect’s devices may be seized and contraband files discovered.

II. How is the Dark Net involved in These Cases?

In a recent case, the DOJ arrested 18 defendants and dismantled four dark web sites dedicated to images and videos containing CSAM in “Operation Grayskull”.

Bitcoin is the most popular dark web currency. Litecoin comes in second as the most popular currency. Administrators of dark web sites use multiple websites under multiple pseudonyms, employing cryptocurrency mixers, numerous cryptocurrency wallets, and intermediary accounts to move the funds in an attempt to evade detection.

When a dark web site is dismantled, the users are tracked and ultimately arrested along with the administrators.

III. What are Some Ways to Defend These Types of Cases?

Conaway & Strickler, PC always advises seeking digital forensic experts in these types of cases. They can mirror image the devices seized and analyze them. They help decipher some of the more technical aspects of the discovery we receive. Their expertise can pinpoint precise steps the government may have missed in their investigation. They can also determine whether files were intentionally accessed, whether timestamps were manipulated, and whether malware or remote-access software could have created the material without the accused’s knowledge.

We also employ forensic psychologists to do a psychosexual evaluation to help provide mitigation and/or to provide a defense to the charges.

Conaway & Strickler, PC represents clients charged with Child Sex Abuse Material at the state and federal level. For further information, please see here or contact us. We are here to help.

What is Money Laundering?

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Wed, 26 Nov 2025 02:14:54 GMT

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.

Why it is Important to have Professional License Defense

Conaway & Strickler, P.C. — Fri, 19 Sep 2025 17:19:02 GMT

Professional license defense is vital. Various professionals must have a valid, active license. When there are allegations of an arrest, substance abuse issues, misconduct or compliance failures, this can lead to disciplinary actions. Understanding what is involved and knowing how to navigate this is crucial for any professional facing such challenges.

Over the past three decades, Conaway & Strickler, PC has represented physicians, nurses, dentists, CPAs, chiropractors, financial advisors, educators, lawyers, and many others. The list of licenses for the state of Georgia shows how many professionals rely on licensure for their livelihood. We provide strong defenses to protect your professional license and preserve your reputation and career longevity.

It is important to contact Conaway & Strickler, PC very early on so that we can make strategic steps to protect your livelihood. For example, a physician who is facing allegations of misconduct may face suspension, probation or revocation. It is important to have experienced legal counsel to effectively navigate these uncertain waters.

Here is a list of the top 10 of the Most Common Disciplinary Actions Against Healthcare Professionals published recently by GCMB. It helps explain some common pitfalls and responsibilities outlined by
the GCMB.

If you are facing any issues with your professional license, we are here to help.

Know Your Rights

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Wed, 11 Jun 2025 13:43:00 GMT

When you’re approached or arrested by law enforcement, it’s natural to feel scared, overwhelmed, or tempted to explain your side. But one of the most powerful tools you have is silence. Under the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, you have the right to remain silent and avoid self-incrimination. This right is reinforced by your Miranda Rights, which police are required to read to you during a custodial interrogation. If you’ve heard the phrase, “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law,” that’s your cue to stop talking and protect yourself.

Many people unknowingly waive their rights by speaking too soon or too freely. Even innocent statements can be twisted or taken out of context. That’s why one of the smartest things you can do is to invoke your right to remain silent and request legal counsel. Simply say, “I am invoking my right to remain silent. I would like to speak to an attorney.” Then stay quiet. You are not being difficult—you are being smart.

At Conaway & Strickler, we understand that early legal representation is crucial. Our experienced defense attorneys are here to protect your rights, guide you through the legal process, and fight for the best outcome possible. If you or a loved one is facing an investigation or has been arrested, don’t speak to the police first—speak to us. Contact Conaway & Strickler today for a free confidential consultation.

Department of Justice Fraud Prosecutions

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Wed, 28 May 2025 13:28:00 GMT

Fraud is a concept that has been in the criminal justice system forever. Google defines it as an intentional deception used to gain an unfair advantage or benefit, often involving financial gains. How does the Department of Justice prosecute fraud? Below is a non exhaustive list of charges that the DOJ can bring.

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.

Deferred Prosecution Agreements in the Health Care Field

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Sat, 08 Mar 2025 13:16:00 GMT

Deferred prosecution agreements: The federal government may target organizations and businesses as well as individuals for violations of federal criminal statutes. For example, in the health care realm, cases can include office managers, practitioners from doctors, nurses to pharmacists to all other aspects of the medical industry. Recent federal investigations have targeted pill mills, medicaid fraud, and accepting kickbacks among others.

Experienced federal criminal defense attorneys like those at Conaway & Strickler, PC may suggest early on about the possibility of entering into a “deferred prosecution agreement” which is essentially a contract with the Department of Justice. DPAs are frequently used in cases involving corporate fraud, bribery, and antitrust violations. These pretrial agreements may involve an admission of wrongdoing, the payment of fines, and the implementation of compliance measures. Charges may be dropped if the defendant complies with the requirements of the agreement. Generally, the Assistant United States Attorney will file the criminal complaint and the DPA with the court, so it is of public record. This will be accompanied by a formal request to the court that any prosecution be delayed according to the terms of the DPA, allowing the defendant to fulfill its agreed-upon actions. This is very similar to conditional discharge / pre trial diversion agreements found at the state level.

An example of a DPA would be one that was entered in to by the DOJ and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc in August 2023 in response to the company’s involvement in a price fixing conspiracy involving several pharmaceuticals. As seen in this example, terms can include paying a fine, waiving certain rights, agreeing to a factual basis for the charges, and an agreement to cooperate and compliance monitoring and of course, agreeing to what will happen if there is a breach of the agreement.

The central benefit to entering in to a DPA is that the individual or business entity is not convicted of any crime. It offers an opportunity to have the federal criminal charges dismissed or dropped once the accused completes all the required conditions.

Here is an another example of a DPA entered in to with the NDGA and Avanir Pharmaceuticals. This pharmaceutical manufacturer based in Aliso Viejo, California, was charged for paying kickbacks to a physician to induce prescriptions of its drug Nuedexta. Of note in that case – the Northern District of Ohio indicted four individuals, including former Avanir employees and one of the top prescribers of Nuedexta in the country, who were involved in the kickback scheme. So, the company itself entered in to a DPA but there was still fall out with respect to some individuals and receiving criminal indictments.

Early intervention is key in a successful resolution in health care criminal matters. We have extensively blogged about health care fraud. Contact us if you need an experienced federal criminal defense litigator. Our firm has vast experience in white collar criminal investigations including False Claims Act and antitrust investigations.

What to Expect in a Federal Criminal Trial

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Sun, 12 Jan 2025 20:22:00 GMT

A federal criminal trial consists of several different stages. The below will analyze a ONE defendant trial. But, more often than not, trials can consist of multiple defendants at trial. This just augments the time needed for each stage.

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.

White Collar Crime at a Crossroads: The Implications of Kousisis on Federal Fraud

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Mon, 16 Dec 2024 19:32:00 GMT

This month, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Kousisis v. United States, a case that could have significant implications on the future of federal white-collar prosecutions. Specifically, the Court is considering the boundaries of federal fraud statutes in scenarios where deceptive practices are employed without causing direct financial harm to the victim.

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.

Recent Computer Hacking Cases in the News

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Sun, 24 Nov 2024 19:06:00 GMT

Recently, Robert Purbeck of Idaho, also known as “Lifelock,” and “Studmaster,” was sentenced to ten years after pleading guilty to federal charges of computer fraud and abuse. He hacked into the computer servers of the City of Newnan, Georgia and a Griffin, Georgia medical clinic, and then targeted at least 17 other victims across the United States – in the process stealing personal information of more than 132,000 individuals. He also attempted to extort a Florida orthodontist for payment in Bitcoin, threatening to disclose stolen patient records and other personal information.

“Cyber extortion is unfortunately a rapidly growing threat and highlights the ever-growing need for corporations to remain vigilant in cybersecurity efforts,” said Sean Burke, Acting Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. “This sentencing is just one example of the FBI working together to hold criminals that hide behind their computers accountable, regardless of their location.”

According to information presented in court, in June 2017, Purbeck purchased access to the computer server of a Griffin medical clinic on a darknet marketplace. He then used the stolen credentials to illegally access the computers of the medical clinic and removed records that contained the sensitive personal information of more than 43,000 individuals, including names, addresses, birth dates, and social security numbers.

In February 2018, Purbeck purchased access to a City of Newnan Police Department server on a darknet marketplace. Purbeck used the stolen credentials to hack into the City of Newnan’s computer systems and stole police reports and other documents, including personal information of more than 14,000 individuals.

Purbeck also attempted to extort a Florida orthodontist in July 2018, demanding a ransom payment in Bitcoin in return for his stolen patient files, threatening to sell the patient and personal information unless the orthodontist paid the ransom. Additionally, Purbeck threatened to sell the personal information of the orthodontist’s minor child. Purbeck harassed the orthodontist and his patients for 10 days with numerous threatening emails and text messages.

Song Wu, Chinese national, was indicted in September 2024, on charges for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft arising from his efforts to fraudulently obtain computer software and source code created by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”), research universities, and private companies.

“Efforts to obtain our nation’s valuable research software pose a grave threat to our national security,” said U.S. Attorney Ryan K. Buchanan. “However, this indictment demonstrates that borders are not barriers to prosecuting bad actors who threaten our national security.” According to information presented in court, Song allegedly engaged in a multi-year “spear phishing” email campaign in which he created email accounts to impersonate U.S.-based researchers and engineers and then used those imposter accounts to obtain specialized restricted or proprietary software used for aerospace engineering and computational fluid dynamics. This specialized software could be used for industrial and military applications, such as development of advanced tactical missiles and aerodynamic design and assessment of weapons. In executing the scheme, Song allegedly sent spear phishing emails to individuals employed in positions with the United States government, including NASA, the U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Army, and the Federal Aviation Administration. Song also sent spear phishing emails to individuals employed in positions with major research universities in Georgia, Michigan, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Ohio, and with private sector companies that work in the aerospace field. Song’s spear phishing emails appeared to the targeted victims as having been sent by a colleague, associate, friend, or other person in the research or engineering community. His emails requested that the targeted victim send or make available source code or software to which Song believed the targeted victim had access. According to the indictment, while conducting this spear phishing campaign, Song was employed as an engineer at Aviation Industry Corporation of China (“AVIC”), a Chinese state-owned aerospace and defense conglomerate headquartered in Beijing, China. AVIC manufactures civilian and military aircrafts and is one of the largest defense contractors in the world.

Ilya Lichtenstein, 35, of New York City, was sentenced recently to 60 months in federal prison for his involvement in a money laundering conspiracy arising from the hack and theft of approximately 120,000 bitcoin from Bitfinex, a global cryptocurrency exchange. According to information presented in court, Lichtenstein hacked into Bitfinex’s network in 2016, using advanced hacking tools and techniques. Once inside the network, Lichtenstein fraudulently authorized more than 2,000 transactions transferring 119,754 bitcoin from Bitfinex to a cryptocurrency wallet in Lichtenstein’s control. Lichtenstein then took steps to cover his tracks by deleting from Bitfinex’s network access credentials and other log files that could have revealed his conduct to law enforcement. Following the hack, Lichtenstein enlisted the help of his wife, Heather Morgan, in laundering the stolen funds. Lichtenstein, at times with Morgan’s assistance, employed numerous sophisticated laundering techniques, including using fictitious identities to set up online accounts; utilizing computer programs to automate transactions; depositing the stolen funds into accounts at a variety of darknet markets and cryptocurrency exchanges and then withdrawing the funds; converting bitcoin to other forms of cryptocurrency in a practice known as “chain hopping;” depositing a portion of the criminal proceeds into cryptocurrency mixing services; using U.S.-based business accounts to legitimize Lichtenstein’s and Morgan’s banking activity; and exchanging a portion of the stolen funds into gold coins. Additional information on this case is available on the United States Department of Justice’s website for large cases here.

P2P Applications and Child Pornography

Law Office of Conaway & Strickler — Sat, 02 Nov 2024 14:16:00 GMT

As we explained in our prior post about federal child pornography laws, the consequences of a child pornography or CSAM (“Child Sexual Abuse Material”) conviction are severe and life-altering. And the collateral consequence of being on the sex offender registry can be devastating.

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.