New Hampshire Federal Fraud Defense Lawyer. A federal fraud investigation may be underway long before anyone calls it a criminal case. One company receives a subpoena. Someone else is asked about a payment. Funds are frozen, records are collected, and former employees are interviewed. When prosecutors finally reveal their theory, they may have already spent months assembling ordinary business documents into an accusation of intentional fraud.
That theory can look tidy because the government decides which records sit next to each other. The defense has to restore what was left out: the rest of the email thread, the work that was actually performed, the advice someone relied on, the pressure surrounding a business decision, and the difference between a venture that failed and a plan that was fraudulent from the beginning.
Cases Handled
Over 10,000
Jail Days Saved
Over 1 Million
Google Reviews
500+ Perfect
Legal Experience
Over 80 Years
A federal investigation can demand immediate decisions from people and organizations in New Hampshire. Combs Waterkotte represents executives, professionals, business owners, health care providers, and companies nationwide. Our federal criminal defense lawyers can enter the case early, control communications with the government, rebuild the complete factual record, and prepare a strategy for motions, negotiations, trial, or sentencing.
Call (314) 900-HELP or contact Combs Waterkotte online for a free, confidential case review.
Free book
Facing Federal Criminal Charges? Why They’re Different and How to Win
Combs Waterkotte, a leading federal criminal defense law firm, has handled over 10,000 cases successfully. This ebook guides you through the federal criminal defense process, how federal charges are different, and how to win.
This guide covers:
- how an accusation of fraud can trigger federal jurisdiction;
- the federal fraud charges and companion offenses prosecutors commonly use;
- how federal fraud investigations, indictments, and sentencing work; and
- how the defense may challenge the government’s theory, the collection of evidence, cooperating witnesses, and the loss figure.
Legal Videos
Can Federal Charges Be Reduced Or Dismissed?
Can Federal Charges Be Reduced Or Dismissed? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek, lawyers with Combs Waterkotte, a leading federal criminal defense firm, talk about proffers, probation, and federal …
Should I Hire A Lawyer Experienced In Federal Defense?
Should I Hire A Lawyer Experienced In Federal Defense? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek from the leading federal criminal defense firm Combs Waterkotte discuss the importance of hiring a lawyer with …
What Penalties Apply To Federal Sex Crime Convictions?
What Penalties Apply To Federal Sex Crime Convictions? Andrew Russek and Chris Combs from Combs Waterkotte federal criminal defense firm discuss potential penalties related to federal sex crime …
Do Federal Sex Crimes Require Sex Offender Registration?
Do Federal Sex Crimes Require Sex Offender Registration? Andrew Russek, a lawyer with leading federal criminal defense firm Combs Waterkotte, discusses the sex offender registry and federal sex …
What Makes A Sex Crime Federal Rather Than State?
What Makes A Sex Crime Federal Rather Than State? Andrew Russek and Chris Combs of Combs Waterkotte discuss factors that play into a sex crime being classified as federal, rather than …
What Are Federal Sex Crime Charges?
What Are Federal Sex Crime Charges? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek of Combs Waterkotte discuss the most common federal sex crime charges. Interview Transcript Scott Michael Dunn: Well, let's …
Can Federal Charges Be Reduced Or Dismissed?
Can Federal Charges Be Reduced Or Dismissed? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek, lawyers with Combs Waterkotte, a leading federal criminal defense firm, talk about proffers, probation, and federal …
Should I Hire A Lawyer Experienced In Federal Defense?
Should I Hire A Lawyer Experienced In Federal Defense? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek from the leading federal criminal defense firm Combs Waterkotte discuss the importance of hiring a lawyer with …
What Penalties Apply To Federal Sex Crime Convictions?
What Penalties Apply To Federal Sex Crime Convictions? Andrew Russek and Chris Combs from Combs Waterkotte federal criminal defense firm discuss potential penalties related to federal sex crime …
Do Federal Sex Crimes Require Sex Offender Registration?
Do Federal Sex Crimes Require Sex Offender Registration? Andrew Russek, a lawyer with leading federal criminal defense firm Combs Waterkotte, discusses the sex offender registry and federal sex …
What Makes A Sex Crime Federal Rather Than State?
What Makes A Sex Crime Federal Rather Than State? Andrew Russek and Chris Combs of Combs Waterkotte discuss factors that play into a sex crime being classified as federal, rather than …
What Are Federal Sex Crime Charges?
What Are Federal Sex Crime Charges? Chris Combs and Andrew Russek of Combs Waterkotte discuss the most common federal sex crime charges. Interview Transcript Scott Michael Dunn: Well, let's …
What Gives Federal Courts Jurisdiction Over Fraud in New Hampshire?
Federal fraud prosecutions begin with jurisdiction. The government must connect the alleged conduct to a federal statute, then prove the link that allows the case to proceed in federal court. Depending on the charge, that link may be a communication system, federally backed money, a covered institution, or a scheme crossing state lines.
A case can attract federal attention through allegations involving:
- electronic messages, calls, transfers, websites, or payment systems used in interstate commerce;
- mailings sent through the U.S. Postal Service or an interstate delivery company;
- an allegation involving a federally protected bank, lender, or credit union;
- federal health programs, benefits, grants, contracts, relief funds, or government-backed lending;
- investor communications or transactions involving securities and commodities;
- an allegedly false certification, application, statement, or document presented to the federal government; or
- a broad alleged scheme involving multiple states, countries, businesses, accounts, or defendants.
The federal link can be surprisingly ordinary for people and businesses in New Hampshire. An electronic payment or overnight delivery may satisfy a jurisdictional requirement, but it does not establish that the transaction was dishonest. Prosecutors still have to prove the charged scheme, the defendant’s knowledge, and the required intent.
Federal Fraud Cases Combs Waterkotte Handles in New Hampshire
Federal prosecutors often choose charges based on how an alleged scheme operated rather than the everyday label someone might use for it. A dispute described as billing fraud, mortgage fraud, investment fraud, or internet fraud may be charged through one or several broader federal statutes. Fraud is one branch of the broader federal white-collar cases Combs Waterkotte handles for clients in New Hampshire and nationwide.
- Wire fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1343: Cases claiming that emails, texts, telephone calls, transfers, websites, or other interstate wires helped advance a scheme to obtain money or property.
- Mail fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1341: Charges claiming that the U.S. mail or a private carrier was used to send documents, payments, or packages connected to alleged fraud.
- Bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1344: Cases accusing someone of using deception to obtain bank property or of carrying out a scheme directed at a covered financial institution.
- Loan and credit application fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1014: Charges alleging that false information was knowingly supplied to influence a bank, lender, or federally connected credit decision.
- Health care fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1347: Cases involving billing, coding, prescriptions, referrals, medical necessity, kickbacks, patient services, or claims submitted to public or private health benefit programs.
- Securities and commodities fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1348: Charges claiming that investors or market participants were misled through disclosures, trading conduct, offering documents, or material omissions.
- Government contract, grant, and benefit fraud: Allegations involving procurement documents, certifications, invoices, eligibility information, disaster relief, federally funded programs, or money belonging to the United States.
- Federal tax fraud and tax crimes: Accusations that a taxpayer or business knowingly concealed income, misstated deductions, failed to remit payroll taxes, or otherwise acted willfully.
- Access device fraud and computer fraud: Investigations of alleged misuse of access devices or protected computers, including credentials, payment information, networks, files, and electronic accounts.
- Honest services fraud under 18 U.S.C. 1346: Charges claiming that a person accepted or offered bribes or kickbacks and thereby deprived another party of the right to honest services.
Dozens of counts do not necessarily mean dozens of unrelated events. Prosecutors often divide one alleged scheme into separate communications and transactions. Defense strategy must examine what each count requires, which evidence supports it, and whether the broad accusation survives when its pieces are tested individually.
The federal system operates under different procedures, charging practices, judges, sentencing rules, and local court requirements. Learn more about the differences between federal and state criminal cases.
How Prosecutors Try to Prove Federal Fraud in New Hampshire
There is no universal checklist for federal fraud because each statute defines its own crime. For cases connected to New Hampshire, however, prosecutors commonly must answer a familiar set of questions about the scheme, the defendant’s knowledge, the alleged falsehood, and federal jurisdiction:
- Did the evidence establish a plan aimed at obtaining money, property, or another legally protected interest?
- Does the evidence show knowing involvement, or merely employment, association, or contact with others under investigation?
- Can prosecutors prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused meant to deceive, rather than made a mistake or relied on information believed to be accurate?
- Was a statement, omission, promise, or representation false or misleading in a way that mattered?
- Did the alleged conduct use or affect the mail, interstate wires, a financial institution, a federal program, or another required federal connection?
How to Recognize a Federal Fraud Investigation in New Hampshire
You do not need to see your name on an indictment before hiring counsel. Early signs may appear through other people or institutions first.
- You received a federal target letter, grand jury subpoena, or another formal request for records or testimony.
- Someone from a federal agency requested an interview, appeared unexpectedly, or left a card asking you to call.
- A subpoena was delivered to a bank, accountant, employer, clinic, vendor, customer, or business associate connected to you.
- Federal agents searched a home, office, clinic, or other location and took electronic devices, files, or records.
- Money became unavailable because an account was frozen, restrained, or targeted for forfeiture.
- A regulatory review, audit, or civil investigation shifted from correcting records to asking who knew what and when.
- Investigators contacted people who may know about your work, finances, relationships, or involvement in the alleged conduct.
- The government requested a voluntary interview or proffer, often presenting it as an opportunity to clear up a misunderstanding.
A request that sounds casual in New Hampshire may be a carefully planned interview. Agents may already know the answer to many of their questions. Speaking without the records in front of you can create inconsistencies. Giving a knowingly false answer can create a separate federal charge even when the underlying fraud allegation is disputed.
Federal Fraud Defense Strategies for New Hampshire Cases
A useful defense for clients in New Hampshire grows from the charged statute and the actual evidence. It may challenge the government’s entire theory or narrow a case count by count.
There Was No Intent to Defraud
A bad result is not the same as an intent to defraud. The accused may have relied on accountants or lawyers, followed an established process, disclosed important facts, or sincerely believed the records were correct. Proof of good faith, legitimate services, and efforts to fix mistakes can contradict the government’s theory.
The Evidence Changes When the Timeline Is Restored
An accusation built from selected documents deserves to be tested against everything the government left out. Full message threads, earlier drafts, later corrections, contemporaneous records, and informed witnesses can explain entries that appear suspicious in isolation.
The Alleged Representation Was Accurate or Immaterial
The document may have been accurate, ambiguous, based on a reasonable interpretation, or completed by someone else. A prediction or estimate may have been presented honestly even though events turned out differently. Some statutes require proof that the alleged falsehood was material to the decision or transaction at issue.
Association Does Not Prove Knowing Participation
Employment, proximity, and communication are not substitutes for knowledge. Someone may have handled documents or transactions without understanding the broader conduct prosecutors attribute to others. The defense can separate ordinary responsibilities from knowing participation.
The Informant’s Account Is Unreliable
A witness may tell the government a story that protects a career, company, or plea agreement. Cross-examination and documentary evidence can reveal what the witness received, what changed over time, and where the account conflicts with the record.
The Required Federal Connection Is Missing
The case does not belong in federal court merely because investigators used federal resources. Prosecutors must establish the specific jurisdictional fact required by the offense, whether it is a wire, mailing, bank, benefit program, or other federal interest.
Suppression May Limit the Prosecution’s Evidence
A federal investigation does not eliminate constitutional limits. The defense can examine the warrant affidavit, the places searched, the data seized, and the circumstances of any interview. An unlawful search or statement may lead to suppression. More information is available in our guide to Fourth Amendment defenses.
The Government’s Loss Figure Overstates the Case
Fraud cases can change dramatically when the loss figure is corrected. The government’s calculation may ignore services delivered, money returned, collateral, credits, causation, or limits on jointly undertaken conduct. It may also attribute transactions to a defendant who neither caused nor agreed to them.
The Federal Fraud Case Process
Some matters arising in New Hampshire are resolved during the investigation; others continue through grand jury proceedings, court appearances, motions, and trial. A typical federal fraud case may include the following steps:
- Investigation: The case may begin with record demands, interviews, surveillance, search warrants, financial analysis, or cooperation from another person. Early defense work can clarify the client’s status and determine whether pre-indictment advocacy is possible.
- Grand jury proceedings: The government may continue collecting evidence through grand jury subpoenas and witness testimony. If jurors conclude there is probable cause, formal charges can be returned in an indictment.
- Initial appearance and release decision: The first court appearance typically addresses the right to counsel, the charges, and pretrial release. The government may seek detention or request restrictions on travel, finances, or communication.
- Arraignment and discovery: After the initial proceedings, the defense receives the government’s evidence and begins comparing the indictment with the documents, financial analyses, interviews, and digital records.
- Motions and expert review: The defense may challenge searches, statements, indictment defects, expert methods, evidence admissibility, or discovery failures. Accountants and other experts may analyze disputed transactions or losses.
- Negotiation or trial preparation: Negotiations may involve dismissal of counts, amended charges, plea provisions, proffers, restitution, or sentencing recommendations. A trial-ready defense continues preparing exhibits, witnesses, and cross-examination while those discussions occur.
- Trial, sentencing, and appeal: At trial, the burden remains on the government to prove each charged element beyond a reasonable doubt. A plea or guilty verdict moves the case to sentencing, while appeal may be available for certain preserved errors and rulings.
How Federal Courts Sentence Fraud Offenses
Federal fraud statutes carry serious maximum penalties, but the statutory maximum is not a prediction of the sentence for a person charged in New Hampshire. The charged counts, criminal history, advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines, facts found by the court, and the factors in federal sentencing law all affect the outcome.
| Federal Statute | General Statutory Exposure |
|---|---|
| Mail fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1341 | The ordinary statutory maximum is 20 years in prison, increasing to 30 years when the offense affects a financial institution or meets certain emergency-benefit provisions. |
| Wire fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1343 | The statute generally authorizes up to 20 years in prison. The maximum may increase to 30 years when the offense affects a financial institution or involves certain emergency benefits. |
| Bank fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1344 | Up to 30 years in prison and a fine of up to $1,000,000. |
| Health care fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1347 | The penalty can reach 10 years for an ordinary offense, 20 years if the conduct results in serious bodily injury, and life imprisonment if it results in death. |
| Securities and commodities fraud, 18 U.S.C. 1348 | The statute provides a maximum of 25 years of imprisonment, while financial penalties, restitution orders, and forfeiture may also apply. |
| False statements, 18 U.S.C. 1001 | Federal false statements are commonly punishable by as much as five years, with other maximums applying in the circumstances identified in the statute. |
| Aggravated identity theft, 18 U.S.C. 1028A | A two-year prison term that generally runs consecutively to the sentence for the underlying felony. |
| Fraud attempt or conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. 1349 | The statutory maximum follows the fraud crime the defendant allegedly attempted or agreed to commit. |
In many fraud cases arising in New Hampshire, the advisory guideline calculation begins with Section 2B1.1. The alleged loss can raise the offense level. Other disputes may involve the number of victims, a person’s role, sophisticated means, abuse of trust, obstruction, acceptance of responsibility, and relevant conduct attributed from other participants.
The government’s financial figures should be separated by purpose. A guideline loss amount does not automatically determine restitution or forfeiture. Beyond those calculations, the judge may weigh health, family responsibilities, personal history, conduct after the offense, and the statutory command to avoid a sentence greater than necessary.
For additional context, read about federal sentencing hearings and guidelines and the availability of probation for federal offenses.
What to Do if Federal Agents Contact You About Fraud in New Hampshire
An unexpected fraud inquiry can feel so wrong that answering seems harmless. The safer response is to pause, preserve the record, and understand the investigation before speaking.
- Speak with counsel before accepting an interview request. You can decline to answer questions and state that an attorney will respond.
- Avoid both false statements and uncertain speculation. If you do not know or do not remember, guessing can create a contradiction. A knowingly false statement may become a separate federal offense.
- Do not clean up files or communications. Deleting or modifying information can destroy helpful context and create allegations of obstruction.
- Do not ask others what they plan to tell investigators. Even a well-intended message can be portrayed as pressure or obstruction.
- Do not answer the allegation through a mass email. Internal communications should be planned carefully because employees or recipients may already have been interviewed.
- Save the complete government communication. Small details such as service dates, names, deadlines, and item inventories may matter later.
- Let counsel examine the demand before records are produced. A subpoena or court order cannot simply be ignored, but its scope, preservation duties, and available objections should be examined.
- Speak with a federal fraud defense attorney in New Hampshire as early as possible. A lawyer may be able to clarify your status, review government demands, and present information before prosecutors make final charging decisions.
Why Hire Combs Waterkotte for a Federal Fraud Case in New Hampshire?
Defending a federal fraud case in New Hampshire requires more than reading an indictment. Counsel must understand how the transaction worked, locate the records that restore context, prepare for federal court, and remember that a person’s liberty, career, and reputation sit behind every document.
- More than 80 years of combined legal experience: Our team has spent decades defending high-stakes cases in both federal and state courts.
- More than 10,000 cases handled and over one million jail days saved: A large body of casework creates practical pattern recognition, helping the defense identify unsupported assumptions, investigative gaps, and pressure points.
- More than 500 perfect Google reviews: The reviews reflect the trust clients place in Combs Waterkotte during frightening and consequential criminal matters.
- Early intervention: Early counsel may clarify whether the client is a witness, subject, or target and can begin preserving evidence while charging decisions remain open.
- A full defense team: Complex cases may require lawyers, investigators, paralegals, law clerks, accountants, computer specialists, and other professionals working from one defense plan.
- Trial preparation from the beginning: Every count is evaluated with trial in mind, even while the team pursues dismissal, pre-indictment advocacy, or a negotiated outcome. That readiness creates leverage throughout the case.
- Client-centered communication: Clients have access to the people handling the matter and receive straightforward guidance about what is happening and what comes next. The firm is available around the clock for urgent developments.
Combs Waterkotte also handles federal cases involving:
Speak With a Federal Fraud Defense Lawyer in New Hampshire Today
Whether agents are still gathering evidence in New Hampshire or prosecutors have already obtained an indictment, the federal case will continue moving. Defense investigation, record preservation, and strategic preparation should begin now.
Call (314) 900-HELP to discuss the case during a free, confidential consultation, or contact Combs Waterkotte online.
