Free Consultations & We're Available 24/7

Call for a free consultation

212-300-5196

FEDERAL CRIMINAL LAWYERS

✓Nationwide Service. A+ Results.
✓Over 50 Years of Experience
✓Available 24/7
✓We Get Cases Dismissed

Talk To An Attorney

Service Oriented Law Firm

WE'RE A BOUTIQUE LAW FIRM.

Over 50 Years Experience

TRUST 50 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.

Multiple Offices

WE SERVICE CLIENTS NATIONWIDE.

NJ CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

  • We offer payment plans, unlike other law firms, in order to make it so you can afford our services.
  • 99% of the criminal defense cases we handle end up with a better outcome.
  • We have over 50 years of experience handling criminal defense cases successfully.

99% Of Cases We Handle
End With a Better Outcome

View more case results







article-37-federal-search-warrant

# What is a Federal Search Warrant

You open the door at 6 AM to find FBI agents with a piece of paper—a federal search warrant—and within minutes your home is being searched, your computers seized, your family terrified. This isn’t a traffic stop, this isn’t a misunderstanding—this is the federal government executing a court-authorized intrusion into your Fourth Amendment right to privacy, and what happens in the next 48 hours determines whether you face federal charges or mount a defense that suppresses evidence before prosecutors even file an indictment. The warrant in your hand represents months of investigation, the warrant authorizes seizure of everything agents believe constitutes evidence, the warrant changes everything. If federal agents executed a search warrant at your home or business, you need an attorney who understands federal warrant procedure—not tomorrow, not next week, but right now while evidence is being reviewed and charging decisions are being made. Call 212-300-5196.

## Your Fourth Amendment Shield

The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches—it doesn’t eliminate government power to search, it channels that power through judicial oversight requiring probable cause before intrusion.[1] Federal search warrants exist because the Constitution demands neutral magistrates evaluate whether law enforcement has sufficient evidence to justify invading your privacy, whether agents can articulate specific facts suggesting crime, whether the warrant describes with particularity what places will be searched and what items seized. A federal magistrate judge—not a prosecutor, not an agent, but a judicial officer—must independently assess the affidavit, must find probable cause exists, must authorize the specific intrusion requested.[2] This is your shield against arbitrary government power, this is the barrier between FBI suspicion and FBI action, this is why warrant challenges matter. The Fourth Amendment doesn’t guarantee agents won’t search—it guarantees they’ll need judicial authorization first, and when that authorization rests on weak probable cause or overbroad descriptions, suppression becomes possible.

## Federal vs State—Why It Escalates Everything

Federal search warrants aren’t issued for state crimes, they’re issued when you’re suspected of violating federal criminal statutes—bank fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, drug trafficking, weapons offenses, public corruption, healthcare fraud, tax evasion, and dozens of other offenses prosecuted by United States Attorneys rather than local district attorneys. The FBI doesn’t execute warrants for shoplifting, the DEA doesn’t search homes for state marijuana possession, the Secret Service doesn’t raid businesses for minor fraud—federal involvement means federal stakes. A federal magistrate judge issues the warrant under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, federal prosecutors review the affidavit before presentation, federal agents execute the warrant with teams of specialists and forensic experts, and federal penalties upon conviction dwarf state sentences.[3] You’re not dealing with local police anymore—you’re facing the full investigative power of agencies with unlimited resources, national jurisdiction, sophisticated technology, and coordination across districts. Federal cases move faster, federal prosecutors have more tools, federal sentencing guidelines impose mandatory minimums, and federal convictions carry stigma that state charges don’t. The moment that warrant becomes federal, everything escalates.

## What Judges Must Believe Before Signing

Probable cause doesn’t mean proof beyond reasonable doubt, it doesn’t mean preponderance of evidence, it means—roughly—a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found in the place to be searched.[4] Federal agents present an affidavit to a magistrate judge detailing their investigation—witness statements, surveillance observations, financial records analysis, cooperating witness information, intercepted communications, physical evidence already obtained, and their belief that additional evidence exists at your location. The judge reviews this affidavit, evaluates whether the facts alleged support probable cause, and either signs the warrant or rejects it. But here’s the problem—magistrate judges see only what agents include in the affidavit, they don’t know what agents omit, they don’t cross-examine the affiant, they don’t hear your side before authorizing intrusion. Agents can present weak evidence in compelling language, agents can omit exculpatory facts, agents can rely on unreliable informants without revealing credibility problems, and magistrates—reviewing dozens of warrant applications weekly—can sign warrants that shouldn’t issue. This is why post-search challenges matter, this is why Franks hearings exist, this is why suppression motions attack the affidavit’s truthfulness and completeness. The probable cause standard is lower than most people realize, and federal agents exploit that standard aggressively.

## What FBI Takes During Search

When federal agents execute a search warrant, they don’t just seize the specific items listed—they seize everything that might contain evidence, everything that might relate to the investigation, everything that looks remotely relevant to federal prosecutors sitting miles away reviewing inventory lists that night.[5] Your computers get seized because emails might constitute wire fraud, your phones get seized because text messages might show conspiracy, your tablets get imaged because photos might document transactions, your USB drives get copied because files might prove money laundering, your external hard drives go into evidence bags because data might reveal criminal activity. Physical documents go too—bank statements, tax returns, business records, notebooks, calendars, address books, letters, receipts, contracts, invoices—anything with writing gets photographed and cataloged. Financial records disappear into evidence—checkbooks, credit card statements, investment portfolios, cryptocurrency wallet information, real estate documents, loan applications, wire transfer receipts. The agents take communications—printed emails, social media posts, messaging app logs, voicemail recordings. Business records vanish—client lists, employee files, accounting spreadsheets, inventory reports, supplier contracts. Everything gets imaged or copied or seized entirely, forensic examiners download entire hard drives creating bit-by-bit copies that preserve every deleted file and metadata fragment, and all of this goes to a federal evidence facility where specialists begin months-long examination processes. You won’t get your electronics back for months, sometimes years, sometimes never if they’re forfeited post-conviction—the government keeps everything until trial concludes and appeals exhaust. Meanwhile prosecutors review what agents found, looking for additional crimes to charge, looking for other people to investigate, looking for probable cause to get more warrants for more locations. One search warrant becomes five becomes ten, one target becomes a conspiracy with fifteen defendants, one investigation into tax evasion becomes a RICO prosecution encompassing a decade of conduct. The evidence seized during execution doesn’t just support the original charges—it generates new charges, new targets, new prosecutions. This is how federal investigations grow, this is how single warrants become sprawling cases, this is why challenging the initial warrant’s validity matters so much. If the first warrant was invalid, everything seized is fruit of the poisonous tree, every subsequent warrant based on that evidence falls, every charge depending on that evidence fails. Constitutional challenges to warrant particularity attack warrants that authorize seizure of “all computers” or “all financial records” or “all documents related to business operations”—these overbroad descriptions violate Fourth Amendment particularity requirements and provide grounds for suppression.[6] The warrant must describe with specificity what’s being sought, not authorize general rummaging through all your possessions hoping to find something incriminating.

## While Agents Search

Stay calm. Don’t resist physically. Observe what agents take. Don’t answer questions. Call an attorney immediately.

## The 48 Hours After They Leave

Federal agents leave behind an inventory receipt listing items seized—read it carefully, note discrepancies, document everything you remember about the search. The evidence goes directly to the investigating agency’s field office where agents and supervising Assistant United States Attorneys begin immediate review.[7] If computers or phones were seized, forensic examiners download contents, bypass passwords, extract deleted files, analyze metadata, and catalog every document, photo, email, and browser history entry. This review generates investigative leads—names to interview, transactions to trace, communications to decode, financial flows to map. Prosecutors evaluate whether seized evidence supports additional charges beyond those underlying the original warrant, whether other individuals appear culpable, whether a grand jury presentation is ready. Within weeks you’ll likely receive a grand jury subpoena or target letter, within months an indictment may be filed, and by then the window for pre-indictment defense has narrowed dramatically. This 48-hour period after warrant execution is critical—this is when defense attorneys can contact prosecutors, can preview defenses, can identify warrant defects, can file suppression motions attacking probable cause or particularity, can negotiate cooperation before charges are filed. Evidence suppression motions must be filed pre-trial, and the earlier they’re filed the more leverage you have.

## Challenging the Warrant Itself

Fourth Amendment challenges attack the warrant’s foundation—was probable cause actually established, did agents misrepresent facts in the affidavit, did they omit material information that would have negated probable cause, was the warrant overbroad authorizing general searches rather than particular seizures?[8] Franks hearings challenge affidavit truthfulness—if your attorney proves agents made intentional or reckless misrepresentations, and proves those misrepresentations were necessary to the probable cause finding, the warrant fails and evidence gets suppressed. Particularity challenges attack warrants that describe items to be seized too broadly—warrants authorizing seizure of “all computers” when only specific files relate to alleged crimes, warrants authorizing searches of entire premises when only one room is relevant, warrants authorizing document seizure without limiting scope to particular time periods or transactions. The good faith exception can defeat suppression—even if the warrant was defective, if agents reasonably relied on a magistrate judge’s authorization, evidence might not be suppressed—but good faith doesn’t apply when warrants are so facially deficient that no reasonable officer would rely on them, when agents knew or should have known the affidavit contained false statements, when magistrate judges abandon their neutral role. Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine extends suppression—if the original warrant fails, everything discovered as a result of that illegal search gets suppressed too, including subsequent warrants, witness statements, physical evidence, and defendant admissions.

## Why Former Prosecutors See What Others Miss

Todd Spodek leads a second-generation criminal defense firm with more than 40 years of combined experience navigating federal investigations from both sides. Having prosecuted federal cases, having worked inside U.S. Attorney’s offices, having reviewed thousands of warrant affidavits and participated in hundreds of searches, former prosecutors understand how federal agents build probable cause, how prosecutors evaluate evidence, how magistrate judges assess warrant applications, and—most importantly—where those processes fail. Spodek Law Group has successfully challenged warrants that appeared solid on their face, has identified affidavit misrepresentations that neutral magistrates missed, has filed Franks motions that revealed investigative misconduct leading to evidence suppression. The firm has represented clients in famous federal cases involving complex financial fraud, public corruption, organized crime, and white-collar offenses where warrant challenges proved dispositive. But the key is pre-indictment intervention—challenging warrants before prosecutors file charges, negotiating with AUSAs while they’re still evaluating evidence, presenting defenses that prevent indictments rather than fighting them post-arrest. Once charges are filed, leverage decreases, once you’re indicted, prosecutors have committed to prosecution, once trial is scheduled, suppression motions face higher skepticism. The earlier you engage experienced federal defense counsel, the better your chances of avoiding charges entirely or securing favorable outcomes.

Federal search warrant execution isn’t the end—it’s the beginning. Call 212-300-5196.

## Citations

[1] Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Fourth Amendment.” Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

[2] United States Courts. “Search and Seizure Warrant (AO 093).” Retrieved from https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/ao093.pdf

[3] Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute. “Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure – Rule 41. Search and Seizure.” Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_41

[4] Scrofano Law, PC. “Everything You Need to Know About a Federal Search Warrant.” Retrieved from https://www.scrofanolaw.com/federal-search-warrant/

[5] Candice Fields Law. “What To Expect During a Federal Search Warrant Execution.” Retrieved from https://candicefieldslaw.com/news/what-to-expect-during-a-federal-search-warrant-execution/

[6] Varghese & Associates, P.C. “Federal Search Warrant Lawyer | Protect Your Rights Now.” Retrieved from https://vargheselaw.com/federal-white-collar-crime-lawyer/federal-criminal-case-process/federal-search-warrant/

[7] Burnham & Gorokhov, PLLC. “If Your Home Has Been Searched by Federal Agents.” Retrieved from https://www.burnhamgorokhov.com/criminal-defense-resources/home-searched-federal-agents/

[8] The Federal Criminal Attorneys. “Understanding Federal Search Warrants and Defense Options.” Retrieved from https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/federal-search-warrants

Request Free Consultation

Videos

Newspaper articles

Testimonial

Very diligent, organized associates; got my case dismissed. Hard working attorneys who can put up with your anxiousness. I was accused of robbing a gemstone dealer. Definitely A law group that lays out all possible options and best alternative routes. Recommended for sure.

- ROBIN, GUN CHARGES ROBIN

Get Free Advice About Your Case

Spodek Law Group

The Woolworth Building, New York, NY 10279

Phone

212-300-5196

Fax

212-300-6371

Spodek Law Group

35-37 36th St, Astoria, NY 11106

Phone

212-300-5196

Fax

212-300-6371

Spodek Law Group

195 Montague St., Brooklyn, NY 11201

Phone

212-300-5196

Fax

212-300-6371

Follow us on
Call Now