Federal conspiracy charges give prosecutors enormous power. The Government can charge you with participating in a federal crime even if you didn’t personally commit the underlying offense. Prosecutors may use text messages, financial transactions, recorded conversations, cooperating witnesses, and ordinary associations with other people to argue that you knowingly joined a criminal agreement.
But suspicion, association, and guilt by association are not enough. The Government must prove a conspiracy and prove that you knowingly and voluntarily joined it.
Conspiracy charges arise in federal drug prosecutions, fraud cases, money laundering investigations, firearms cases, public corruption investigations, tax cases, and virtually every other area of federal criminal law. Once prosecutors allege a conspiracy, they may also try to hold you responsible for conduct committed by others.
That makes it critical to attack the Government’s theory from the beginning.
Attorney Michael J. Petro represents people targeted in federal investigations and charged with federal conspiracy offenses. He examines whether an agreement actually existed, whether the Government can prove knowing participation, whether cooperating witnesses are credible, whether evidence was lawfully obtained, and whether prosecutors are attempting to attribute someone else’s criminal conduct to the defendant.
If federal agents are investigating you or you have already been charged with conspiracy, do not wait for the Government to build its case around its version of the facts. Contact Attorney Michael J. Petro to discuss the investigation, the evidence against you, and your defense.
What Is a Federal Conspiracy?
At its core, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to accomplish an unlawful objective.
The general federal conspiracy statute is 18 U.S.C. § 371. It prohibits conspiracies either to commit an offense against the United States or to defraud the United States or one of its agencies. Section 371 also requires an act to carry out the conspiracy’s object.
In a § 371 prosecution, the Government generally must establish:
- Two or more people agreed to accomplish an unlawful objective.
- The defendant knew the unlawful purpose of the agreement and voluntarily joined it.
- At least one conspirator committed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy.
The Government does not need a written agreement or a formal plan. Prosecutors may attempt to prove an agreement through circumstantial evidence.
But an agreement is still required. Evidence that people knew one another or engaged in related conduct does not automatically establish that they agreed to commit a federal crime.
Mere Association Is Not a Federal Conspiracy
One of the most important issues in a conspiracy prosecution is the difference between association and agreement.
A person does not automatically become a conspirator because he:
- Knows people engaged in criminal activity.
- Is present when criminal activity occurs.
- Has a business or personal relationship with an alleged conspirator.
- Performs an act that happens to benefit a conspiracy.
- Knows about a conspiracy but never agrees to participate in it.
The Government must prove knowing and voluntary participation in the unlawful agreement.
This distinction can become critical when prosecutors build their case primarily from circumstantial evidence gathered during a lengthy federal investigation.
Federal Drug Conspiracy Charges
Federal drug conspiracies are different from prosecutions under the general conspiracy statute.
Under 21 U.S.C. § 846, a person who conspires to commit a federal drug offense is subject to the penalties applicable to the underlying drug offense.
Most importantly, the Government does not have to prove an overt act in a § 846 drug conspiracy. The Supreme Court established that rule in United States v. Shabani.
Federal drug conspiracies can also expose a defendant to substantial mandatory minimum sentences depending upon the controlled substance, drug quantity, criminal history, and other circumstances.
Attorney Petro discusses these prosecutions in greater detail on the Federal Drug Crimes page.
Fraud and Financial Crime Conspiracies
Conspiracy charges are also common in complex financial investigations.
Prosecutors may allege conspiracies involving wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, health care fraud, money laundering, or other financial offenses. In these cases, ordinary business communications and financial transactions may become part of the Government’s attempt to prove a criminal agreement.
The defense must distinguish legitimate business activity from evidence that actually proves knowing participation in a fraudulent scheme.
Learn more about defending these cases on Attorney Petro’s Fraud and Financial Crimes page.
You Can Be Charged Without Personally Committing the Underlying Crime
A common misunderstanding is that prosecutors must prove a defendant personally committed the substantive federal offense to convict them of conspiracy.
That is not how conspiracy law works.
Conspiracy is a separate crime based on the alleged agreement. Depending on the circumstances, prosecutors may charge conspiracy even when the planned crime was unsuccessful or was never completed.
The Government may also attempt to hold a conspirator responsible for criminal conduct committed by other members of the conspiracy.
That can dramatically expand both criminal exposure and potential federal sentencing consequences.
Cooperating Witnesses and Federal Conspiracy Cases
Many federal conspiracy prosecutions depend heavily on cooperating witnesses.
A cooperating witness may be someone who has already been charged and hopes to receive a reduced sentence by providing information or testimony against other people.
That creates an obvious question for the defense: What does the witness receive in exchange for cooperating?
The defense must investigate the witness’s plea agreement, prior statements, criminal history, benefits received from the Government, inconsistencies, and reasons to shift responsibility to someone else.
A witness who participated in the alleged conspiracy may have a substantial incentive to minimize his own conduct while exaggerating someone else’s involvement.
Challenging the Government’s Conspiracy Evidence
Federal conspiracy cases are intensely fact-dependent.
The defense should examine whether the evidence proves an agreement and whether it shows the defendant knowingly joined it.
Important questions include:
Was there actually an agreement?
Parallel conduct or association between people does not necessarily establish an unlawful agreement.
Did the defendant know the unlawful objective?
The Government must prove more than innocent participation in activity that later benefited others engaged in criminal conduct.
Did the defendant voluntarily join the conspiracy?
Knowing that others are committing crimes differs from agreeing to participate in their criminal plan.
How reliable are the cooperating witnesses?
Their motives, prior inconsistent statements, plea agreements, sentencing exposure, and benefits from cooperation may become critical evidence.
Was evidence obtained illegally?
Search warrants, electronic surveillance, traffic stops, interrogations, cell phone searches, and other investigative techniques may present grounds for a motion to suppress. Attorney Petro addresses these constitutional issues extensively in his Search and Seizure resources.
Withdrawal From a Federal Conspiracy
Joining a conspiracy and later stopping participation are not necessarily the same as legally withdrawing from it.
Withdrawal can become important in determining continuing responsibility and, in some cases, the statute of limitations.
Simply becoming inactive may not be enough. Courts must carefully examine the specific facts surrounding the defendant’s actions and communications.
Federal Conspiracy Sentencing
Conspiracy charges can carry serious sentencing consequences because the sentencing analysis may extend beyond acts the defendant personally committed.
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines govern relevant conduct and jointly undertaken criminal activity. Determining the proper scope of the defendant’s agreement can therefore become critical at sentencing.
The Government should not automatically be permitted to attribute every act of every alleged conspirator to every defendant.
Defense counsel must determine the scope of the criminal activity the particular defendant actually agreed to undertake and challenge conduct that falls outside that scope.
Read more about the Guidelines and the sentencing process on the Federal Sentencing page.
Fight the Federal Conspiracy Charge
Federal conspiracy prosecutions can turn ordinary relationships, conversations, transactions, and associations into alleged evidence of a criminal agreement.
The defense must force the Government to prove its case defendant by defendant. Who made the alleged agreement? What exactly did the defendant agree to do? What evidence proves that he knew its unlawful purpose? Which witnesses are cooperating to reduce their own sentences? Which acts actually fall within the scope of the alleged agreement? Was the Government’s evidence obtained legally?
Those questions can determine the case’s outcome.
Attorney Michael J. Petro defends people facing federal criminal investigations and prosecutions in Tampa, Chicago and nationwide. He challenges the Government’s evidence, cooperating witnesses, conspiracy allegations, and attempts to hold a defendant responsible for conduct the evidence does not prove.
A federal conspiracy charge can expose you to years in federal prison. Fight the Government’s allegations before they become accepted as fact. Contact Attorney Michael J. Petro to discuss your federal conspiracy case and the defense.