Federal Criminal Defense in Nevada

Common Defense Statutes and Strategies

 
Facing federal criminal charges can be an overwhelming and daunting experience, particularly because the penalties involved tend to be severe. Nevada residents or individuals who face federal charges within the state are often unaware of how complex these cases can be. The attorneys at Hofland & Tomsheck, led by Josh Tomsheck, a nationally board-certified criminal trial attorney, are highly experienced in defending individuals against a wide range of federal offenses in Nevada's federal courts.
 
 

Federal Criminal Defense Overview 

 
Federal crimes involve violations of federal statutes, prosecuted by the U.S. government, rather than the state of Nevada. Federal offenses often involve matters that affect interstate commerce, violations of U.S. constitutional rights, and crimes that involve federal agencies like the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), or Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
 
Defending federal criminal cases requires an in-depth understanding of both federal statutes and procedural rules. Federal criminal charges are handled in U.S. District Courts, and the cases follow the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. In Nevada, federal criminal cases are typically heard in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, located in Las Vegas and Reno.
 

Common Federal Charges and Applicable Statutes

 
Federal charges encompass a wide range of offenses, from drug trafficking to white-collar crimes. Some of the most common charges include:

Drug Trafficking (21 U.S.C. § 841): This statute governs the unlawful manufacture, distribution, and possession with the intent to distribute controlled substances. A federal drug trafficking charge may carry harsh penalties, including mandatory minimum sentences, particularly if the offense involves large quantities or takes place near a school or public facility.

Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 371): Conspiracy is often charged in connection with other federal crimes. This statute criminalizes an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime. Even if the actual crime never takes place, agreeing to commit a federal offense can lead to conspiracy charges.

Mail Fraud and Wire Fraud (18 U.S.C. §§ 1341, 1343): Fraud charges are common in federal court, particularly when they involve the use of mail or electronic communications to execute a fraudulent scheme. Convictions can lead to significant prison time and heavy financial penalties.

Money Laundering (18 U.S.C. § 1956): Money laundering involves engaging in financial transactions to conceal the origin of funds obtained through illegal activities. Federal prosecutors aggressively pursue money laundering cases, and convictions can result in both criminal and civil penalties.

Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) (18 U.S.C. § 1961): RICO charges are used to combat organized crime and criminal enterprises. A person or organization can be charged under RICO for participating in a pattern of racketeering activity, which includes crimes such as bribery, extortion, and drug trafficking.
 

Federal Criminal Defense Strategies

Successfully defending federal charges requires not only knowledge of federal laws but also the development of tailored strategies that account for the complexities of federal prosecution. Josh Tomsheck and his team at Hofland & Tomsheck employ several proven defense strategies to safeguard their clients' rights and protect them from unwarranted convictions.
 

1. Challenging Evidence and Violations of Constitutional Rights: Many federal cases hinge on evidence obtained through searches, seizures, or wiretaps. If law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI or DEA, violate the Fourth Amendment rights of an individual by conducting illegal searches and seizures, any evidence obtained can be excluded from trial. Josh Tomsheck has a strong background in constitutional law and has successfully argued for the suppression of unlawfully obtained evidence, leading to the dismissal or reduction of charges. For example, in drug trafficking cases, evidence such as illegal drugs or communications intercepted without proper authorization may be thrown out if it can be shown that the proper legal procedures, such as obtaining a warrant, were not followed.

2. Disputing Intent in Fraud and White-Collar Crimes: Federal fraud charges often require the prosecution to prove that the defendant had the intent to commit fraud. In many cases, the defense strategy involves challenging the government's ability to prove intent. Josh Tomsheck employs an aggressive approach, working to show that the client acted without criminal intent or had a good-faith belief that their actions were legal. For example, in mail and wire fraud cases, Tomsheck may present evidence demonstrating that the client was misled by third parties, lacked knowledge of the fraudulent scheme, or believed their actions were lawful under the circumstances.

3. Attacking the Conspiracy Charges: Conspiracy charges are notoriously broad, often relying on minimal evidence of an agreement between parties. Josh Tomsheck has successfully defended clients by arguing that there was no clear agreement to commit a crime or that the client's actions were entirely independent and did not involve any concerted effort to break the law. In some cases, conspiracy charges may also be attacked by questioning the credibility of co-conspirators who testify for the prosecution in exchange for reduced sentences or other incentives.

4. Self-Defense and Justification in Violent Crimes: Federal violent crime charges, such as those involving firearms, are prosecuted aggressively. However, in cases where the defendant acted in self-defense or had a legal justification, Tomsheck has successfully used these defenses to secure acquittals. For example, in cases involving firearms possession, it may be possible to show that the defendant was lawfully exercising their Second Amendment rights or using the firearm in a legitimate self-defense scenario.

5. Negotiating Favorable Plea Agreements: Federal cases often carry the risk of lengthy prison sentences. In certain situations, it may be in the client's best interest to negotiate a plea agreement that minimizes potential penalties. Josh Tomsheck's experience as a former Chief Deputy District Attorney in Clark County gives him a unique advantage in negotiations, as he understands the prosecution's tactics and can often secure favorable outcomes without going to trial. Plea agreements can be particularly advanvageous in drug trafficking or conspiracy cases, where mandatory minimum sentences apply, and reducing the charges can lead to significantly lower penalties.

6. Pre-Trial Motions: Suppressing Confessions and Expert Witness Challenges:  Another critical stage in many Federal Defense cases in Nevada are pre-trial motions.  Sometimes there are grounds to suppress evidence such as confessions or statements made to law enforcement, especially when they were obtained through coercion or in violation of the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights. In federal cases, law enforcement officials are required to provide Miranda warnings to individuals in custody before interrogation. If these warnings were not properly administered, any statements or confessions made by the defendant may be excluded from evidence. Josh Tomsheck has successfully filed motions to suppress confessions that were improperly obtained, leading to key pieces of evidence being thrown out and significantly weakening the prosecution's case.  In other cases there can be grounds to suppress physical evidence of for favorable rulings form the court on evidentiary issues.  Every case is different, but a Las Vegas Federal lawyer who is adept at identifying motion issues and knowing how to use Federal Evidence and Procedure rules to your advantage is of critical importance to your best defense.  

7. Trial Defense: Some cases simply cannot resolve without a Trial.  Having a Nevada Federal Defense lawyer who is prepared, confident and experienced in Trial is the single greatest asset you can have in your defense. The Government has the sole burden of proving the serious charges they have filed against someone, and they must prove it through witness testimony at Trial. One of the most effective defense strategies is the rigorous cross-examination of government witnesses. Many federal cases rely heavily on witness testimony, including cooperating witnesses who may have made deals with the prosecution in exchange for reduced sentences. Josh Tomsheck meticulously prepares for cross-examination, exposing inconsistencies in testimony, bias, or ulterior motives that may undermine the credibility of key witnesses. In cases where the prosecution relies on the testimony of expert witnesses, Tomsheck will also challenge the qualifications, methodology, or conclusions of these experts, further weakening the government's case. Additionally, presenting alternative theories to the jury can be a powerful tool in securing an acquittal. In federal fraud or conspiracy cases, for example, Tomsheck may present evidence that suggests the defendant was not involved in the criminal scheme or acted without criminal intent. By providing jurors with an alternative explanation of events, Tomsheck can create reasonable doubt, leading to acquittals or favorable verdicts. In many cases, this approach has led to full exonerations for his clients in Nevada's federal courts.

8. Navigating the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: The federal sentencing guidelines play into a critical role in determining the penalties for federal crimes. These guidelines provide a framework for sentencing based on the severity of the offense and the defendant's criminal history. However, they are not mandatory, and with the right defense strategy, it is possible to argue for a downward departure from the recommended sentencing range.

 
Josh Tomsheck and his team are skilled at presenting mitigating factors to the court, such as the defendant's lack of prior criminal history, role in the offense, and other personal circumstances that may justify a reduced sentence.
 

Why Choose Josh Tomsheck for Federal Criminal Defense in Nevada?

Josh Tomsheck a nationally board-certified criminal trial attorney with a deep understanding of federal criminal law and procedure. As a former Chief Deputy District Attorney, he has the experience, knowledge, and trial skills necessary to handle complex federal cases. Whether your case involves drug trafficking, conspiracy, fraud, or violent crimes, Tomsheck is committed to providing aggressive representation and achieving the best possible outcome for his clients in Nevada's federal courts.
 
If you or a loved one are facing federal criminal charges, it's crucial to have an experienced defense attorney on your side. Contact Hofland & Tomsheck today for a consultation with Josh Tomsheck, and take the first step toward protecting your future.
 
 

Serious Defense for Serious Federal Changes