THE CHETSON FIRMCriminal Defense Attorneys
19 W. Hargett St., Suite 400, Raleigh, NC 27601 | info@chetson.com
Federal conspiracy is the government's most powerful charging tool — and its most broadly applied. You can be convicted based on the acts of people you barely know, for conduct you never personally performed, on evidence consisting largely of cooperating witnesses testifying to reduce their own sentences. Effective conspiracy defense requires knowing exactly how these cases are built — and where they can be taken apart.
State & Federal Criminal Law
NC State Bar — 2016 to Present
Eastern District of North Carolina
Federal Court-Vetted Counsel
Capital Defender First Chair Roster
NC Habeas Capital Roster
Federal conspiracy under 18 USC § 371 makes it a crime for two or more persons to agree to commit a federal offense and for any one of them to take an overt act in furtherance of that agreement. The agreement itself — not completion of the underlying offense — is the crime.
Drug conspiracy under 21 USC § 846 is even broader: no overt act is required. The government need only prove you agreed with at least one other person to distribute a controlled substance. The penalty equals that for the completed offense under § 841 — including all mandatory minimums.
"In a conspiracy case the government can convict you for what your alleged co-conspirators did — people you may have met only once, or whose conduct went far beyond what you contemplated. Challenging the scope of the conspiracy and your actual role is where these cases are won."
(1) Agreement between two or more persons; (2) to commit a federal crime; (3) at least one overt act in furtherance; (4) knowing and voluntary participation.
(1) Agreement between two or more persons; (2) to distribute a controlled substance; (3) knowing and voluntary participation. No overt act required.
Under Pinkerton v. United States (1946), a conspirator can be held responsible for the reasonably foreseeable acts of co-conspirators done in furtherance of the conspiracy — even acts the defendant never knew about and never participated in. This doctrine massively expands criminal liability.
In federal drug conspiracies, the quantity attributed to a defendant determines whether mandatory minimums apply and what the Guidelines range will be. A defendant can be held responsible for the entire quantity handled by the conspiracy — not just what they personally possessed. Contesting this attribution is often the most impactful defense work in federal drug cases.
Federal Kidnapping Conspiracy (EDNC, 2018) — Millions of pages of discovery. After thorough preparation and cross-examination of cooperating witnesses, jury returned a not guilty verdict on all conspiracy charges.
Club Shooting Federal Conspiracy (EDNC, 2019) — Four jurors refused to convict on federal conspiracy charges. Matter later resolved through plea to substantially reduced charge.
Seafood Mislabeling Federal Grand Jury (2019) — Five clients facing federal grand jury subpoenas. Motion to Quash succeeded. None of the five were charged.
Yes. That is the essence of conspiracy — the crime is the agreement, not the completion of the underlying offense. You can be convicted of drug conspiracy even if no drugs were ever distributed, as long as the government proves you agreed to participate in a distribution scheme.
Withdrawal is a defense — but requires affirmative action to defeat the conspiracy, not merely ceasing to participate. You must show you took some affirmative step to disavow it, such as notifying co-conspirators or informing law enforcement. Timing and nature of withdrawal are critical.
Through recorded communications (phone, texts, email), testimony from cooperating co-defendants, surveillance, financial records, and circumstantial evidence of behavior consistent with knowing involvement. Challenging the inference of knowing participation — by showing innocent explanations — is a core trial strategy.
Potentially, but not necessarily. Under USSG § 1B1.3, you should only be held responsible for relevant conduct — acts of co-conspirators within the scope of the jointly undertaken activity and reasonably foreseeable to you. Arguing for a narrower scope — supported by evidence limiting what was foreseeable to you — is one of the most impactful arguments in federal drug conspiracy sentencing.
Board Certified in Federal Criminal Law. CJA Panel attorney. 15+ years of federal court experience. Free, confidential consultation.
The Chetson Firm · 19 W. Hargett St., Suite 400, Raleigh, NC 27601
Results vary by case. Past outcomes do not guarantee future results. Information on this website does not constitute legal advice. Damon Chetson is licensed in North Carolina and admitted in the Eastern, Middle, and Western Districts of NC and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. NC Bar RPC 7.2.