Your Case. Our Cause.

Aggressive And Highly Successful Advocates For Defendants In Federal Criminal Prosecutions And Investigations Brought By United States Attorneys’ Offices

We regularly and aggressively defend individuals and entities in the trial of Federal criminal prosecutions, and in connection with Federal investigations. We recognize that, even though all cases cannot ultimately proceed to a jury trial, they must be prepared from the outset with that singular goal end in mind. We have obtained extraordinary results for our clients in Federal criminal matters. However, we can do more than just say that we have been, or will be, successful in trying to jury verdict Federal criminal cases. We have a track record of having actually done it.  This includes the fact that Mike Leonard is believed to be the only presently practicing Federal criminal attorney who has obtained six or more not guilty jury verdicts on all counts and charges in Federal criminal prosecutions brought by the United States Attorneys’ Office for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago). In selecting an attorney for representation in Federal criminal matters, an attorney’s track record of actual success in Federal criminal jury trials is critically important. Accordingly, a client facing potential or actual Federal criminal charges should not hesitate to ask about an attorney’s jury trial history in Federal criminal prosecutions. Moreover, because we did not use previously work for the United States Attorneys’ Office as Federal prosecutors, we bring a unique and defense-oriented perspective to the defense of Federal criminal prosecutions.

We also regularly provide zealous representation in connection with pre-charge plea negotiations, as well as in connection with what is often a crucial part of Federal criminal cases – sentencing submissions and sentencing hearings under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

We have achieved similar success in representing individuals facing State criminal charges. This includes a recent complete not guilty jury verdict in favor of our client in a murder prosecution brought by the Cook County State’s Attorneys’ Office.

In addition to our trial work, we have handled numerous appeals at the Federal and State level, within and outside the Federal and State appellate courts located within Illinois.

Representative Federal And State Criminal Cases Handled

In our years of service to Chicago and greater Illinois, we have worked with clients involved in a wide range of cases including those alleging:

  • Conspiracy
  • Mail fraud
  • Wire fraud
  • Bank fraud
  • RICO
  • Bank robbery
  • Hobbs Act robbery
  • Drug conspiracy, possession, and distribution
  • Securities fraud
  • Acting as agent for a foreign government
  • Theft of Federal benefits
  • Mortgage fraud
  • Medicare fraud
  • Medicaid fraud
  • Kickbacks
  • Identity theft and misuse
  • Re-entry violations
  • Cargo theft
  • Counterfeiting
  • Financial fraud
  • Home repair fraud
  • Gun possession and gun use
  • Federal protected species violations
  • Murder, attempted murder, and other crimes of violence

Begin Your Defense Today

Whether you are facing charges already, or whether you believe that you might be questioned or charged, consult with us now to begin preparing and building your defense. Contact us by calling 312-815-6572 or using our online contact form.

How many federal criminal trials have you won? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:04
we’ve had eight separate cases where the

0:08
jury has returned uh not a single count

0:11
of guilty against our clients meaning

0:14
that in seven out of eight of those

0:16
cases the client is walking totally free

0:18
in the eighth case there was one count

0:21
against our client but that was a

0:23
mistried case a mistried count so eight

0:27
occasions where essentially the jury

0:29
didn’t find our client guilty of a

0:31
single count which is highly unusual in

0:33
federal court you have a lot of lawyers

0:34
who unfortunately have not experienced

0:37
the thrill of a not guilty in federal

0:39
court in a criminal trial some have

0:41
experienced once or twice and we’ve been

0:43
on that board about eight times which is

0:45
highly unusual and so that’s kind of one

0:48
of our calling cards our ability to be

0:50
successful against the feds in criminal

0:52
trials in Chicago and elsewhere

What types of federal criminal cases have you tried? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:04
my experience in handling cases on

0:07
behalf of defendants and federal

0:08
criminal cases is extremely wide a lot

0:11
of the cases surprisingly would seem

0:13
like they would be typically state court

0:14
cases so a wide variety of drug cases

0:18
gun cases cases such as carjackings

0:22
kidnappings bank robberies surprising to

0:25
some people a lot of those what are

0:27
called sort of Street crimes are federal

0:29
cases but also some of the larger cases

0:32
that we handled are things like murder

0:34
for hire in federal court Health Care

0:37
fraud on a regular basis bank fraud

0:41
conspiracy wire fraud mail fraud because

0:45
of our length of time I’ve been

0:46
practicing probably handled every type

0:48
of federal criminal offense that you can

0:50
imagine but in terms of the white collar

0:52
cases which is one of our Hallmarks they

0:55
typically tend to be in their domain of

0:57
healthcare fraud bank fraud mortgage

1:00
fraud some sort of fraud scheme that

1:03
allows the feds to charge the k

1:04
typically because there’s a wire fraud

1:07
element to whatever the fraudulent

1:09
scheme is that you can imagine that

1:11
could be charged in federal court

What should I look for in hiring a lawyer to defend me against federal charges? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:05
a lawyer for a federal criminal case I

0:07
think there’s a multitude of factors but

0:09
several basic ones first of all does the

0:12
lawyer have a deep experiencing handling

0:14
Federal cases because there is a lot of

0:17
difference in terms of procedure law and

0:20
nuance and sort of courtroom decorum in

0:23
federal court versus state court so I’d

0:25
want an attorney who has a wide body of

0:27
federal experience number two and most

0:30
practically is an attorney who’s had

0:32
success actually winning Federal jury

0:35
trials because there’s only two options

0:37
in a federal case it’s either going to

0:38
plead or it’s going to go to trial so

0:40
I’d certainly want to know has this

0:43
attorney has they have they stepped

0:44
before a jury have they experienced the

0:46
success of getting not guilty jury

0:48
verdicts in federal court of course if

0:50
I’m a consumer or Advocate or anybody

0:53
I’d probably want to hire the person

0:55
that wins more often versus the person

0:58
who’s never won a case in federal court

0:59
so those would be key factors and the

1:02
last part would be just a comfort level

1:04
with the attorney again of the fact that

1:06
they feel that they can have a

1:08
relationship with them that they have a

1:10
hundred percent confidence that that

1:12
person is going to do everything they

1:14
can to either win the case at trial or

1:16
to get the most favorable plea agreement

1:18
that they can just a level of trust and

1:20
confidence and respect between the

1:23
lawyer and the client

What are the federal sentencing guidelines? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:04
the federal sentencing guidelines are at

0:07
the Forefront of any criminal case from

0:09
your initial evaluation of the case

0:12
to assessing your odds at trial and

0:15
making a risk benefit with your client

0:16
and then of course if your client is

0:18
found guilty at the sentencing phase but

0:21
what they really are are series of

0:23
guidelines or rules that the courts

0:25
apply in federal cases which primarily

0:28
takes into two factors the offense level

0:31
that’s assigned to the crime meaning a

0:33
higher number would correspond with what

0:36
people believe to be the sentencing

0:38
commission believes to be a a more

0:39
serious offense and the second

0:41
significant factor would be the

0:43
defendant’s criminal history on how many

0:45
other occasions have they been convicted

0:47
of crimes but the federal sentencing

0:49
guidings have also changed in a real

0:51
significant way over the last 10 years

0:53
and now there’s something called the

0:55
3553 factors that the courts recognize

0:59
where we as attorneys can really bring

1:01
to the attention almost anything that

1:03
would be considered mitigating evidence

1:05
that should be considered in the court

1:07
sort of taking a holistic view of the

1:10
defendant but the reason why why people

1:12
place so much emphasis on the federal

1:14
sentencing guidelines are the often very

1:16
Draconian penalties associated with

1:19
federal crimes you might have a client

1:21
who’s facing a mandatory minimum

1:23
sentence of 10 years or 15 years or 20

1:27
years those are stiff sentences and

1:29
sometimes it might be up to life so you

1:32
have to be extremely confident in your

1:34
attorney that they have the ability to

1:36
take your case to trial because

1:38
sometimes you really don’t have any

1:40
choice a client’s often not going to

1:42
take sitting down without a trial 10 or

1:45
15 or 20 years or up to a life sentence

1:47
without going to trial so the selection

1:51
of a trial attorney who can take your

1:53
case to try out the federal level and

1:54
win is of Paramount importance

What is your experience in handling federal and state criminal appeals? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:04
work has been pretty wide and varied

0:07
I’ve actually argued appeals in the

0:10
state of California in the Supreme Court

0:12
of Idaho in other Federal circuits but

0:15
the emphasis because we’re at Chicago

0:17
based is the seventh Circuit Court of

0:19
Appeals where I’ve argued many Federal

0:22
Criminal and Civil Appeals before the

0:24
seventh circuit and then also an

0:25
Illinois state court before the Illinois

0:28
Pelt courts in various locations in the

0:30
state arguing criminal cases on appeal

0:33
and also civil cases and that’s a much

0:36
different process and experience because

0:38
obviously you’re not before a trial

0:40
court judge you’re before a tribunal of

0:43
three judges and the fun part and the I

0:46
guess the exciting and scary part of

0:48
doing a pill work is that you know the

0:50
judges get to ask you whatever they want

0:52
whenever they want and interrupt you in

0:54
the middle of your argument so I think

0:56
it’s kind of a fun challenge as an

0:58
attorney to be able to think on your

1:00
feet and be the type of individual that

1:02
can just get peppered with questions and

1:04
be ready for you know sort of all comers

Can you tell us about a memorable case you handled involving federal charges? | Michael Leonard

From Michael's interview for the Masters of the Courtroom series on ReelLawyers.com.

View Transcript

0:04
probably like to talk about what one of

0:06
our most recent wins in January of 2023

0:10
we represent an individual who was a

0:13
high-ranking employee of a medical

0:15
device company and the case went to

0:17
trial here in federal court in Chicago

0:18
for a couple of weeks and we had been

0:21
working with a client since 2019 so it

0:24
was a culmination of four years of

0:26
effort and you know really a

0:29
firm belief from the get-go that this

0:32
client never should have been charged

0:34
that Not only was she not guilty but she

0:37
was innocent and after a two-week trial

0:39
after hearing from a dozen Witnesses or

0:41
so the jury returned to verdictive not

0:43
guilty on all charges against her and

0:46
it’s memorable in the sense that you

0:48
know going out with the client

0:49
afterwards to celebrate with her and her

0:51
mother to see the smile on her face it

0:54
really almost felt like I was with a

0:56
different person so I’ll always remember

0:58
that smile and and the real person

1:01
coming out after it’s sort of this

1:03
burden had been lifted from her out

1:05
there this four-year battle