Federal Money Laundering Defense Lawyers

Federal law provides that a person who conducts a financial transaction, knowing that the property involved in the transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity with the intent to promote the carrying on of the unlawful activity is guilty of money laundering. A person is also guilty of this offense if they engage in a financial transaction knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part to conceal or disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, or the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity.

A person may also commit money laundering if the person, with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity or to conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of property believed to be the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, conducts or attempts to conduct a financial transaction involving property represented to be the proceeds of specified unlawful activity.

Under federal law, the term "knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represents the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity" means that the person knew the property involved in the transaction represented proceeds from some form, though not necessarily which form, of activity that constitutes a felony under State, Federal, or foreign law.

Significant cases:

• United States v. Abbell - The first element that the government must prove in a money laundering case is that the money is tainted.
• United States v. Christo - In order to be considered tainted, the funds must come from the proceeds of a completed crime.
• United States v. Majors - For a conviction based on the concealment element, the concealment must be substantial. Spending tainted funds is not enough to establish concealment.
• United States v. Farese - Exchanging small bills for larger denominations can satisfy the concealment element of a money laundering charge. A few large denomination bills are easier to transport and hide than a more substantial quantity of small bills.
• United States v. Blankenship - Whether a defendant engages in unnecessary transactions to further distance himself from tainted funds is a factor in considering if concealment occurred. However, this is not a requirement because any conduct that makes funds more concealed after a transaction than before satisfies the concealment element.

Our law firm has extensive experience in defending serious federal criminal cases in the metro areas of Atlanta, Athens, Macon, Augusta, Savannah, Rome, Columbus, Albany, Valdosta and in other Georgia federal courts. Please contact us if you need a criminal defense lawyer who has successfully resolved federal money laundering charges.