Federal Cases

Since 1986, Ruth Liebesman has specialized in the defense of federal criminal prosecutions.  She has handled Racketeering, Drugs, Murder, Gun Running, Wire Fraud, Bank Fraud, Mail Fraud, Passport and Immigration Fraud, and numerous other federal, criminal cases.  She has taken a number of those cases to trial since starting her own practice in 1990. 

Ruth has handled numerous pretrial hearings, which is where many cases are won or lost. This is where the judge determines whether the evidence at trial was lawfully and constitutionally obtained. Ruth has obtained suppression of statements, including some made after the defendant was informed of his right to remain silent and to have an attorney (the Miranda warnings).  She has gotten federal judges to rule that physical evidence seized after the home owner signed a consent form was not admissible because the police had coerced the homeowner into signing the consent form. 

Ruth is an expert in federal sentencing, having lectured on the subject.  The Federal Sentencing Guideline provide a formula for federal judges to use when determining an appropriate sentence,  Ruth obtains sentences well-below the federal sentencing guidelines recommended range on a regular basis.  After demanding Fatico hearings to challenge uncharged conduct alleged by the United States Attorney’s office in an effort to increase the sentencing range, Ruth has obtained favorable rulings in which the judge found insufficient evidence of the uncharged conduct.  The federal judges, once again, sentenced the defendant below his advisory guidelines range.

After a person has been convicted after trial or in a plea agreement, he or she may seek to have a higher court rule that the conviction was not lawful.  Ruth has handled dozens of federal appeals, most recently winning a full reversal of her client’s convictions for murder, racketeering, drug dealing and weapons possession, his life sentence, as well as suppression of all physical evidence seized in the case.  See United States v. Cruz-Ramos, 13-2291, in the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

While an appeal addresses matters that occurred during the hearings or trial, a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus addresses matters not “on the record,” such as newly discovered evidence, evidence hidden by the prosecutor, or the trial lawyer’s failure to investigate exculpatory evidence.  Ruth Liebesman has filed a number of Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus, including Espinal v. Bennett, in which she obtained a reversal of the defendant’s conviction after the he had spent 20 years in jail for a murder he did not commit.