Laundering statutes target transactions designed to conceal the nature or source of funds. The government must show that money derived from unlawful activity and that the defendant conducted or attempted to conduct a financial transaction knowing the illicit origin. We dissect the paper trail—bank records, wire data, and business ledgers—and challenge the leap from suspicious activity to criminal intent.

Key fights involve what counts as “proceeds,” whether funds were truly concealed, and whether transactions were routine business. We use forensic accounting to provide alternative explanations and to show lack of nexus between funds and any predicate offense. Where assets are seized, we pursue administrative and judicial forfeiture challenges to return property.

At sentencing, we contest loss calculations, push for realistic ability‑to‑pay findings, and argue for alternatives to incarceration where appropriate—especially for first‑time, non‑violent offenders.

Federal and state money-laundering prosecutions target financial transactions meant to conceal criminal proceeds. Armour Legal partners with forensic accountants to scrutinize bank records, contest Currency Transaction Reports (CTRs), and challenge the government’s interpretation of “proceeds.”

We file motions under CAFRA (Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act) to recover seized assets and argue lack of nexus between funds and alleged predicate crimes. Our multi-front defense covers criminal charges, civil-forfeiture petitions, and regulatory compliance to safeguard both liberty and property.

We defend laundering cases by dismantling assumptions. The State must prove proceeds of unlawful activity and a transaction designed to conceal them. We bring in forensic accountants to analyze inflows/outflows, legitimate revenue streams, and routine business transactions that prosecutors mislabel as concealment. We push courts to separate suspicious from criminal—and to limit any forfeiture to assets actually tied to alleged wrongdoing.

At sentencing, we fight inflated “loss” numbers and argue for terms that reflect the client’s history and risk profile. Where property is seized, we file timely administrative/judicial challenges and negotiate return or carve‑outs so families are not stranded. The objective is to reduce exposure while protecting assets and future employability.