Joshua L. Dratel, P.C.

United States v. "Taylor" - Began representing Mr. Taylor at sentencing at the conclusion of his re-trial on fraud and conspiracy charges, and obtained a non-Guidelines sentence of one year and one day, when the government urged, and Mr.Taylor was at risk of, a 57-month sentence. The case also involved litigating complicated forfeiture issues in the context of a "white collar" criminal case;

United States v. "King" - Represented defendant in federal criminal case in which he was convicted after trial and faced sentencing as a Career Offender, with a Sentencing Guidelines range of 26 years. He was sentenced to seven years in prison;

United States v. "Fletcher" - Represented defendant in federal criminal case in which he pleaded guilty and faced sentencing as a Career Offender, with a Sentencing Guidelines range of 151-188 months. He was sentenced to 17 months in prison;

United States v. "Ramananthan" - Represented defendant who pleaded guilty in federal criminal case alleging support for a designated terrorist organization, and received a sentence of one year and one day in prison;

United States v. "John" - Represented defendant convicted in federal court for material support for terrorism, and succeeded in negotiating a plea agreement that did not include a sentencing Guidelines enhancement for terrorism;

United States v. "Rogers" - The firm began representing Ms. Rogers at the sentencing and appeal phase and obtained a non-Guidelines sentence of 28 months even though the Sentencing Guidelines prescribed - and the government urged - a sentence of 30 years to life;

United States v. "Jones" - Began representing Mr. Jones on appeal from conviction of terrorism charges. The case involved litigating the Daubert test relating to reliability and relevance of an expert witness, other evidentiary issues connected to corroboration of a confession, and the waiver of Miranda rights;

United States v. "Fielder" - Began representing Mr. Fielder on appeal after conviction from insider trading and conspiracy charges. In this white collar criminal case, the government brought charges based on novel theories of venue in connection with Internet presence, insider trading, and wire fraud. The case presented further issues of complexity based upon the government's wrongful implications of a 9/11 and terrorism connection. Thus, this case presented an opportunity to use our expertise in both terrorism and "white collar" criminal appeals;

United States v. "Brown" - Appeal from conviction after trial of the largest postal fraud ever prosecuted, involving forfeiture issues, the right to confront witnesses, and sufficiency of the evidence of a defendant's participation in a conspiracy;

United States v. "Fenton" - Appeal from conviction after trial in a million dollar tax evasion prosecution involving Statute of Limitations issues;

United States v. "Cooper" - Appeal from conviction after trial in Embassy Bombings prosecution involving warrantless wiretapping and search of U.S. citizen overseas; application of Classified Information Procedures Act; materiality of primary government witness's statements that were recorded pretrial but not produced to the defense until a year after trial, and sentencing (resulting in remand for re-sentencing); and

United States v. "Burns" - Appeal from conviction after trial involving admissibility of (a) classified evidence shown to the jury but not to the defendant, (b) statements obtained from the defendant while he was in the custody of a foreign government, after consultation with U.S. agents; and (c) videotaped deposition testimony of foreign law enforcement agents, in a foreign country, with the defendant not present (but observing via video conferencing).

Practice Areas