FEDERAL CRIMINAL DEFENSE
Deportation Defense * Immigration Court Representation * Bond Hearings * Appeals
Federal Criminal Defense Attorney | New York & Connecticut
When the federal government targets you, it brings resources no individual defendant can match alone. Federal prosecutors — Assistant United States Attorneys — are career specialists who dedicate their professional lives to building and winning cases in the same courtrooms where your freedom will be decided. Behind them stand the full investigative power of the FBI, the DEA, the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, the Secret Service, Homeland Security Investigations, and dozens of other federal agencies. Federal cases frequently involve years of pre-indictment investigation before a single charge is filed. By the time you are arrested or served with an indictment, the government has often already built what it believes is an airtight case. The federal conviction rate consistently exceeds 90% — not because the government is always right, but because defendants who face the federal system without elite-level legal representation rarely survive it. The consequences of a federal conviction are categorical and unforgiving. There is no parole in the federal system. Mandatory minimum sentences are imposed by statute, not by a judge's discretion — and they can run for decades. Federal Sentencing Guidelines create ranges that judges are required to calculate and seriously consider. A federal criminal conviction carries collateral consequences that follow a person for a lifetime: loss of civil rights, deportation for non-citizens, loss of professional licenses, and permanent reputational damage. Pre-indictment intervention and aggressive defense strategy are not luxuries — they are necessities. Smith & Company exists to provide both.
Federal Court Is Different From State Court
Federal prosecutors are Assistant United States Attorneys (AUSAs) who handle narrow categories of cases with singular focus. An AUSA in the SDNY's Narcotics Unit has prosecuted dozens of drug trafficking cases. An AUSA in the Complex Frauds and Cybercrime Unit has handled some of the most sophisticated white-collar prosecutions in American history. These are not generalist attorneys — they are specialists backed by the investigative resources of federal law enforcement agencies including the FBI, the DEA, the IRS Criminal Investigation Division, and Homeland Security Investigations. Facing this level of expertise requires defense counsel with equivalent depth of experience in federal court practice. Before a federal charge is filed, a grand jury of 23 citizens convenes in secret to determine whether probable cause exists to indict. Prosecutors present only their evidence — there is no defense, no cross-examination, no judge moderating the presentation. Grand jury targets, subjects, and witnesses have different rights and exposure levels, and navigating this phase correctly is critical. A "target" is someone the grand jury is investigating with a view toward indictment. A "subject" is someone whose conduct falls within the scope of the investigation. A "witness" simply has relevant information — but that status can change quickly. Understanding where your client stands in a grand jury investigation, and acting swiftly to protect their rights, is work that must begin immediately. Mandatory minimum sentences under federal statutes fundamentally change the nature of criminal defense. Unlike state court, where a judge often has wide discretion to tailor a sentence to the individual, federal mandatory minimums strip that discretion away. A conviction for certain drug trafficking offenses triggers a mandatory minimum of 5, 10, or even 20 years in federal prison — regardless of the defendant's background, family circumstances, or the judge's personal view of what is fair. The existence of these mandatory minimums changes the strategic calculus of every federal case — from the decision of whether to fight at trial versus negotiate a plea, to whether to seek "safety valve" relief or cooperation credit. Every decision must be made with full knowledge of the mandatory minimum exposure. The United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) govern federal sentencing even when mandatory minimums do not apply. The Guidelines calculate a recommended sentencing range based on two variables: the offense level (determined by the nature of the crime and specific offense characteristics, such as drug quantity, loss amount, or use of a weapon) and the criminal history category (I through VI, determined by prior convictions). While the Supreme Court's Booker decision made the Guidelines advisory rather than mandatory, they remain enormously influential — judges must calculate the range, explain any departure from it, and a sentence within the range is presumptively reasonable on appeal. Fighting to reduce the offense level through objections to the Presentence Report, pursuing downward departures, and arguing for a below-guidelines variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) are all critical components of federal defense strategy.
SERVING NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY CONNECTICUT AND MASSACHUSSETTS
FEDERAL WEAPONS CHARGES LAWYER | 18 U.S.C. § 922 | NEW YORK & CONNECTICUT
Federal gun charges are fundamentally different from state weapons charges — and the difference is measured in years of mandatory federal prison time. There is no parole in the federal system. When a federal court imposes a sentence, you serve it — at least 85% of it, often more. A five-year mandatory minimum means a minimum of four years and three months in federal custody before any possibility of supervised release. And because federal firearms enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) run consecutively — stacked on top of every other sentence in the case — a defendant charged with a drug crime and a § 924(c) firearms charge can see their total sentencing exposure multiply rapidly. Understanding the structure of federal weapons charges, and the defenses available, is the first step toward building a real defense.
FEDERAL WEAPONS CHARGES WE DEFEND
FELON IN POSSESSION OF A FIREARM (18 U.S.C. § 922(G))
A person convicted of any felony offense is permanently prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition under federal law. A violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) carries up to 10 years in federal prison for a first offense. However, if the defendant has three prior convictions for serious drug offenses or violent felonies, the Armed Career Criminal Act enhancement applies — and the mandatory minimum skyrockets to 15 years. Defense of felon-in-possession charges begins with a careful analysis of the circumstances of the firearm's discovery — was the search that led to the gun constitutional? — and a meticulous examination of every prior conviction for potential ACCA qualification challenges.
ARMED CAREER CRIMINAL ACT (ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(E))
The Armed Career Criminal Act is one of the most consequential sentencing enhancements in federal law. Three prior "serious drug offenses" or "violent felonies" — as defined by the statute — trigger a mandatory 15-year minimum sentence, with no safety valve and no early release eligibility below that threshold. The definitions of qualifying predicate offenses are highly technical and have been dramatically reshaped by recent Supreme Court decisions, including Johnson v. United States (2015) and its progeny, which struck down the vague "residual clause" of the violent felony definition. Many prior state convictions that the government seeks to use as ACCA predicates no longer qualify under current law. Smith & Company analyzes every prior conviction with precision, because a successful ACCA challenge can mean the difference between a 15-year mandatory sentence and a standard 10-year maximum.
USING A FIREARM DURING A DRUG CRIME OR CRIME OF VIOLENCE (18 U.S.C. § 924(C))
A conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) — using, carrying, or brandishing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime or crime of violence — carries a mandatory 5-year consecutive sentence for a first offense. A second or subsequent § 924(c) conviction adds a mandatory 25 years — consecutive to everything else. These sentences do not merge with the underlying offense; they run on top of it. A defendant who pleads guilty to a drug trafficking offense with a 10-year mandatory minimum and a § 924(c) charge is looking at a minimum of 15 years in federal prison. Challenging the § 924(c) charge — whether through suppression, sufficiency of evidence, or legal challenges to the definition of "crime of violence" — is among the highest-priority tasks in any case where it is charged.
ILLEGAL GUN TRAFFICKING AND STRAW PURCHASES (18 U.S.C. § 922(A))
Federal law prohibits purchasing a firearm on behalf of another person — a "straw purchase" — and prohibits dealing in firearms without a federal firearms license. These charges are often brought in conjunction with broader trafficking investigations targeting networks that move firearms from states with permissive gun laws into states like New York and Connecticut with stricter regulations. Penalties for illegal dealing carry up to 5 years per count; straw purchase violations carry up to 10 years. Smith & Company defends these charges by challenging the government's proof of the defendant's knowledge and intent with respect to the ultimate purpose of the purchase.
​POSSESSION OF UNREGISTERED NFA WEAPONS
The National Firearms Act (NFA) regulates silencers (suppressors), short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, machine guns, and destructive devices — requiring them to be registered with the ATF and taxed. Possession of an unregistered NFA weapon carries up to 10 years in federal prison. Machine gun possession — including possession of auto sears and conversion devices — is treated with particular severity. These cases often turn on technical questions about the definition of the weapon category, whether the device in question legally qualifies as a regulated NFA item, and the circumstances of its discovery.
DEFENSE STRATEGIES
SUPPRESSION: THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
​The Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures is the most powerful weapon in the federal gun defense arsenal. Many federal firearms cases arise from traffic stops, Terry stops, vehicle searches, or searches incident to arrest — each of which is governed by specific constitutional requirements that law enforcement must meet. If the stop lacked reasonable suspicion, if the search exceeded the lawful scope, if the warrant lacked probable cause, or if no valid exception to the warrant requirement applies, the firearm must be suppressed. Without the gun, there is no case. Smith & Company scrutinizes every federal firearms arrest for Fourth Amendment violations and files suppression motions in every case where the constitutional record supports one.
CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION
When a firearm is discovered in a vehicle with multiple occupants, or in a home or apartment shared by multiple people, the government may charge everyone in proximity with possession. But possession — actual or constructive — requires proof that the defendant knew about the firearm and had dominion and control over it. The government cannot simply prove that you were in the same space as a gun. Smith & Company challenges constructive possession aggressively, scrutinizing the physical evidence (fingerprints, DNA, location of the weapon), witness statements, surveillance footage, and text messages to establish that the firearm belonged to, and was controlled by, someone else.
CHALLENGING ACCA PREDICATE CONVICTIONS
The Armed Career Criminal Act's application depends on the legal categorization of prior state convictions — and that categorization is governed by a complex and evolving body of Supreme Court case law. Many state convictions that would intuitively seem to qualify as ACCA predicates do not, in fact, meet the statutory definitions under current precedent. A prior conviction for a state drug offense may not qualify as a "serious drug offense" if the state statute is broader than the federal definition. A prior violent felony conviction may not qualify if the state offense of conviction does not have as an element the use of physical force against a person. These are highly technical, highly consequential legal questions — and Smith & Company analyzes every prior conviction with exacting attention to get them right.
ENTRAPMENT IN GUN TRAFFICKING STINGS
Federal law enforcement agencies conduct undercover sting operations targeting firearms trafficking networks, using agents who pose as buyers or sellers to identify and arrest traffickers. When government agents initiate the criminal activity, provide the means and opportunity for the offense, and target individuals who were not predisposed to commit gun trafficking absent the government's inducement, an entrapment defense is available. Smith & Company evaluates the government's conduct in sting operations carefully and presents the entrapment defense forcefully when the facts support it.
Federal gun charges mean mandatory federal prison time. Call Smith & Company now — we start working on your defense immediately.