Because 90 percent of all federal cases end in a plea deal, criminal defense lawyers have become sentencing lawyers rather than trial lawyers. Defense lawyers should not abandon vigorously defending their clients before juries. The authors suggest, however, that lawyers must begin to view trial preparation through the lens of sentencing.

DOJ has had mixed success in the prosecution of traders. Where is the dividing line between illegal activity and savvy trading? Susan Brune and Erin Dougherty review the major categories of recent prosecutions and highlight the key issues that have presented obstacles to conviction – and opportunities for the defense.

How can a defense attorney minimize the potentially long-lasting impact of burdensome pretrial release conditions? How can the defense attorney engage in meaningful review, especially when the assistant U.S. attorney refuses to produce an exhibit list?

Does a common feature of restitution orders – joint and several liability – violate the Excessive Fines Clause? There is “no general federal right to contribution” between co-defendants under restitution orders. This seemingly creates an Eighth Amendment problem in that a defendant can be held jointly liable for a co-defendant’s restitution yet has no right to collect contribution from the co-defendant.

Representing Federal Government Contractors in Parallel Criminal, Civil, and Administrative Investigations

Federal contractors often face a “three-headed monster” of parallel criminal, civil False Claims Act, and administrative investigations. Each investigation involves different procedures, different obligations, and different potential sanctions. Sara Kropf and Margaret Cassidy provide practical approaches to developing strategies to help manage risk.

The Human Toll of Civil Forfeiture presented by Jennifer McDonald and Dan Alban of Institute for Justice

Reports and other resources on forfeiture reform

NACDL successfully advocated for the passage of asset forfeiture reform legislation in Ohio. 

NACDL supported asset forfeiture reform efforts in North Dakota. 

What are bitcoins? Why do they have value? Where are criminal defense attorneys likely to see bitcoins in their cases?

This special issue of The Champion, which coincides with NACDL’s Sixth Annual White Collar Seminar, is the perfect opportunity to reflect on both the past accomplishments of the Association’s white collar initiative and the path moving forward.

Executive Director Norman Reimer's letter to the Ohio House Judiciary Committee regarding a proposal to eliminate the civil forfeiture process and rely only on criminal forfeiture and its requirements (HB 347, 2015).

This Article argues that to impose criminal liability, prosecutors ought to be required to prove a conspiracy's dangerousness. In doing so, it also provides insight into conspiracy law that Katyal and Goldstein leave unilluminated. Their opinions on conspiracy's dangerousness diverge because they assume different group data sets: Katyal views only criminal conspiracies, and Goldstein views groups in general. This Article applies a neutral, systemic analysis where theirs do not and thus generates workable, effective reforms where theirs cannot.

Opinions of the U.S. Supreme Court in Pinkerton et. al. v. United States 328 U.S. 640 (1946)

State and federal laws allow law enforcement agencies to seize the property of an individual who has not been charged with a crime.  This practice tears at the heart of justice and fairness in our system and turns the fundamental principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty on its head.

NACDL believes that asset forfeiture represents one of the most fundamental threats to the individual liberties of those accused of criminal activities as well as citizens not charged with any crime.  NACDL strongly encourages the reform of asset forfeiture laws.