What Is a Federal Subpoena?

What Is a Federal Subpoena?

You received a federal subpoena in the mail—and your hands shake as you read the formal language commanding your appearance before a grand jury or demanding documents from your business records or personal files, the weight of the federal government suddenly pressing down on your daily life with an urgency that transforms ordinary Monday morning into something existential. This isn’t a parking ticket, this isn’t a civil dispute—this is the apparatus of federal criminal justice reaching directly into your world, and what you do next matters more than you might realize, matters in ways that extend far beyond simple compliance or defiance.

The subpoena sits on your kitchen table like an unexploded device. You read it again. And again. The questions multiply faster than answers: Am I a target? Am I a witness? What happens if I ignore this? What happens if I comply? The federal system doesn’t explain itself in plain English—it speaks in citations to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure^[1], it references Title 18 of the United States Code, it assumes you understand terms like “duces tecum” and “ad testificandum” without bothering to translate the Latin into the language you actually speak. This is the constitutional crisis that arrives without warning in a standard envelope, and the decisions you make in the next 72 hours can determine whether you walk into that grand jury room as a witness who leaves unscathed or as a defendant who just handed prosecutors the evidence they needed to indict you.

What the Document Actually Means

A federal subpoena is a court order—not a request, not an invitation, but a command backed by the full authority of a federal judge—requiring you to either testify before a grand jury or produce documents and physical evidence relevant to a federal criminal investigation^[2]. The subpoena comes in two primary forms, and the distinction matters enormously: a subpoena ad testificandum compels your personal appearance to provide sworn testimony, while a subpoena duces tecum demands that you produce specific documents, records, electronic data, or physical objects without necessarily requiring you to testify about them^[3]. Both types carry identical legal weight—both originate from Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17, which grants federal courts sweeping authority to compel evidence and testimony from anyone within United States territory—but the strategic implications differ dramatically depending on which type lands in your mailbox.

Federal grand jury subpoenas can be served anywhere in the United States and require no advance court approval—a federal prosecutor can issue one unilaterally by requesting blank forms from the court clerk, filling in your name, and having it served by a U.S. Marshal. This asymmetry of power—the government’s ability to compel your participation without judicial oversight—reflects the grand jury’s historical role as both investigative weapon and citizen protection^[4].

Your Constitutional Position

The Fifth Amendment stands between you and compelled self-incrimination, but invoking that protection requires precision and timing that most people lack without experienced counsel—you can assert your Fifth Amendment right to refuse testimony that might incriminate you, but that protection doesn’t excuse you from appearing in response to the subpoena, and it doesn’t extend to the production of pre-existing documents that might contain incriminating information, this distinction—between testimonial statements you make under oath and documents you created before the investigation began—represents one of the most consequential asymmetries in federal criminal procedure, one that has destroyed lives when misunderstood, one that separates defendants who walk away from federal indictments and defendants who spend decades in federal prison wondering what went wrong in that grand jury room where they thought they were being helpful but were actually constructing the evidentiary framework for their own prosecution, where they believed that telling their side of the story would clear everything up but instead gave prosecutors the final testimonial admissions needed to satisfy each element of the charged offenses. You have the right to legal representation, and if you’re facing a federal grand jury subpoena, exercising that right isn’t optional—it’s existentially necessary—because the grand jury proceeding itself excludes your attorney from the room while you testify, leaving you alone with prosecutors and grand jurors asking questions designed to elicit incriminating statements that can be used against you later, your attorney cannot sit beside you during grand jury testimony, cannot object to questions, cannot stop you from answering in ways that seem helpful but actually construct the framework for your eventual indictment, you can leave the grand jury room to consult with counsel waiting outside—and you should, frequently—but the psychological pressure of that formal setting, the institutional authority radiating from federal prosecutors who have done this thousands of times while you’re doing it for the first time, the sense that cooperation will somehow result in the government recognizing that you’re not really a bad person and deciding not to charge you, all of these factors create an environment where even sophisticated individuals—business executives, doctors, lawyers themselves—make catastrophic mistakes because they don’t understand that grand jury proceedings aren’t about finding the truth, they’re about building cases, and every answer you provide either strengthens the case against you or provides ammunition for the defense you’ll need if you’re indicted, but you can’t know which answers fall into which category without understanding what the government already knows and what holes remain in their evidence, without understanding whether prosecutors are fishing for confirmation of theories they can’t yet prove or testing whether you’ll contradict statements that cooperating witnesses have already provided under immunity agreements.

The critical question—whether you are a target, a subject, or merely a witness—determines your entire strategic approach. Targets have substantial evidence already linking them to criminal conduct—they face imminent indictment risk and should rarely testify without immunity agreements^[5]. Subjects occupy the dangerous middle ground where cooperation might prevent charges or might provide the final pieces prosecutors need. Witnesses possess relevant information but aren’t under investigation—though that status can change mid-testimony.

The Consequences of Your Choices

Ignoring a federal subpoena isn’t an option—it’s a federal crime under 18 U.S.C. § 401, which grants courts authority to hold in contempt anyone who disobeys a lawful subpoena without adequate excuse^[6]. The government will seek enforcement, and once a judge issues a contempt order, you face immediate arrest and detention—which could mean months behind bars. United States v. Barnette demonstrates the reality: 18 months in federal prison for refusing to comply.

Compliance creates its own risks. Providing documents can supply prosecutors with evidence needed to establish federal offenses—financial records, emails demonstrating conspiracies, text messages revealing consciousness of guilt. Testifying without immunity can result in perjury charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1621 if your testimony conflicts with other evidence^[7].

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) allows courts to quash subpoenas that are unreasonable or oppressive—you must file written objections within 14 days of service^[8].

What You Need

Strategic counsel. Immediate action. Someone who understands federal prosecutors. Call 212-300-5196.

Why Spodek Law Group

Todd Spodek brings second-generation criminal defense experience to these cases—his father’s 40-plus years of criminal defense work established the foundation, but Todd has built something more sophisticated on that foundation, a practice that combines old-school understanding of prosecutor psychology with contemporary expertise in complex federal investigations. The famous cases that have defined the firm’s reputation—high-profile federal prosecutions that required not just legal skill but tactical creativity—demonstrate the level of advocacy that federal subpoena situations demand.

You need someone who has argued Fifth Amendment issues before federal judges countless times, someone who understands the difference between cooperation that protects you and cooperation that destroys your leverage. Federal subpoenas escalate toward either indictment or declination—your attorney’s strategic choices largely determine which outcome materializes.

Time Runs Out Fast

Federal investigations move faster than you expect—grand juries can investigate for months, but strategic windows close within days of subpoena service—and the distinction between being a witness who walks away and a defendant who faces decades in prison often hinges on decisions made when competent counsel could have preserved options.

Call 212-300-5196.

References

1. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 17, Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School

2. U.S. Department of Justice, Justice Manual § 9-11.000, Grand Jury (2024)

3. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, “Subpoena Duces Tecum” Definition

4. The Federal Grand Jury, Congressional Research Service Report 95-1135

5. Justice Manual § 9-11.151, Subpoenaing Target of Grand Jury Investigation

6. 18 U.S.C. § 401, Power of Court (Contempt Authority)

7. 18 U.S.C. § 1621, Perjury Generally

8. Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 17(c), Quashing or Modifying Subpoenas