fedral criminal

begest criminal defense attorneys-attorneys for attorneys-attorneys federal criminal-lawyer speeding -attorneys-criminal defense-federal-criminal-lawyer&attorneys-federal criminal-federal criminal attorneys-fedral criminal defense attorny-about fedral criminal defense attorny-news about fedral criminal defense attorny-about fedral criminal-about fedral criminal defense-about defense attorny-news about fedral criminal-tallking about fedral criminal defense attorny-tallking about criminal

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Federal Criminal Investigations By Aaron Larson Law Offices of Aaron Larson

If you are contacted by the federal authorities in relation to a criminal investigation, the first thing you must attempt to determine is if you are being contacted as a potential witness or as a suspect. The second thing you must determine is what statements you can safely make to the authorities without potentially falling into a trap, such as being charged with lying to federal agents. Consider for example the case of Martha Stewart, who was acquitted of any direct criminal wrongdoing but spent time in prison for making false statements to federal investigators.

A federal criminal defense lawyer can help you assess the nature and purpose of the investigation, and why you are being approached। While you should expect your lawyer to instruct you to provide honest answers to any questions from the federal authorities, your lawyer may be able to guide you around any potential traps or pitfalls. When appropriate, a federal criminal defense lawyer can be present during any questioning, act as an intermediary between you and the investigating authorities, or advise you to exercise your Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. If appropriate, a federal criminal defense lawyer may be able to work out a deal where you will cooperate with the investigation, in return for more favorable treatment when the investigation is concluded. In appropriate cases your lawyer may also be able to secure a letter of declination, in which the U.S. attorney formally declines to prosecute you in relation to a particular offense or investigation.

By Aaron Larson Law Offices of Aaron Larson

The Federal Criminal By Aaron Larson Law Offices of Aaron Larson

The federal criminal system is in many ways like the state system, but it has some very significant differences. One difference is that the typical United States Attorney's office, responsible for prosecuting federal criminal charges, has significantly more time and resources to direct to any given prosecution than would a state prosecutor.

Federal prosecutors also typically have better academic credentials than state prosecutors, and many have a great deal of latitude in selecting the cases they wish to prosecute through the federal courts. Save for crimes which occur on federal land, those cases which fall exclusively to the jurisdiction of a federal prosecutor tend to be of an interstate nature, and are more likely than a state prosecution to be legally and factually complex.

As a result, federal criminal defense tends to involve cases which are more difficult to defend, and the cost of defense is often very high। In each federal jurisdiction there is also a Federal Defender's office, which can provide legal representation to indigent defendants.

By Aaron Larson Law Offices of Aaron Larson

Tuesday, July 8, 2008

Justice Dept. Sued Over Political Bias Applicants Begin Coming ForwardJustice Dept. Sued Over Political Bias Applicants Begin Coming Forward By Carrie

Armed with solid grades, glowing recommendations and a pair of internships, Sean M. Gerlich confidently applied to the Justice Department honors program two years ago, only to get a rejection letter.

Gerlich now suspects he was cast aside because of political considerations, part of a pattern of illegal hiring decisions based on partisanship that are now being documented by the Justice Office of the Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility.

Investigators unveiled a report late last month detailing the litmus tests used in making selections for the intern and honors program. One hiring panel member performed Google searches for candidates' ties to environmental and social justice groups, the report said.

"It appears the politicization at Justice was so pervasive that even interns had to pass a partisan litmus test," House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) said last week.

More lengthy investigative reports on troubles in the civil rights unit and the firing of nine U.S. attorneys -- the focus of multiple congressional hearings and scores of media accounts -- are expected to be released this summer.

ad_icon

The revelations have brought strong reactions. Last week Gerlich sued the Justice Department for privacy violations, seeking access to his employment files and other paperwork from the committee that nixed his application. He suspects that the Justice Department hiring panel may have rejected him because of his work as a volunteer for Amnesty International and for a Democrat running in a state congressional race.

"The irony," said Gerlich, a young lawyer who now works for a firm in Brussels, "is I'm not actually especially liberal, particularly as regards antitrust law, the area in which I applied. I'm right of center."

Hiring improprieties violate Justice Department policy and civil service laws, but they do not carry criminal penalties. Statements that former Justice officials made under oath to investigators and to Congress, however, could be subject to review for possible perjury and obstruction of justice, experts say.

Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said that the department had overhauled its hiring practices in advance of the inspector general's report and reiterated that politics should play no role in prosecutions. Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said government attorneys will review Gerlich's lawsuit and will respond in court.

Three other young lawyers who contacted a reporter after reading the inspector general's report said they, too, have a hunch they were screened and rejected from the honors program for political reasons. Gerlich said he hopes that others will join the lawsuit and turn it into a class-action dispute.

Justice policy and the Civil Service Reform Act prohibit discrimination in hiring because of numerous factors including race, religion and political affiliation. The inspector general and Office of Professional Responsibility report asserted that using ideology "can also create the appearance that candidates are being discriminated against based on political affiliation."

But former Justice officials said it is naive to think that political considerations play no role in employment.

"Elections have consequences," said Mark Corallo, a Republican who was a Justice Department spokesman under Attorney General John D. Ashcroft. "I expect the next attorney general will be seeking to hire people of like mind. There's nothing criminal, sinister or out of the ordinary. It's normal."