Federal False Statements Defense Lawyer

A false statement can occur in many different forms. Its most common form, however, has four (4) elements:

1. A false statement;
2. The statement was made knowingly and willfully;
3. The falsity was material, and;
4. It involved “any matter within the jurisdiction” of the government.

The offense of False Statements can also include concealing a material fact or using a falsified document.

False Statements is a felony offense which carries zero to 5 years in prison. In some cases involving terrorism or sex offenses, the maximum sentence is increased to 8 years in prison.

The statute of limitations for False Statements is 5 years, which begins to run upon completion of the crime.

Yes, it is possible to avoid prison if you are convicted of False Statements as there is no mandatory minimum sentence. This means that a judge could sentence you to probation or house arrest instead of prison.

For a False Statements conviction, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines typically use Section 2B1.1 to calculate the offense level. In most cases, the base offense level is 6 (which recommends a sentence of zero to 6 months in prison). The offense level, however, can increase significantly depending on the loss amount and other enhancements that may apply.

The statute criminalizing false statements is broad. Prime examples of cases the government has previously charged include:

• Misleading an FBI agent during a federal investigation.
• Lying on an application for government assistance (such as a PPP loan application).
• Lying on an application for federal employment.
• Submitting a false tax return.
• Misrepresenting facts on forms to get a federal certification.
• Lying on forms to obtain government ID or passport.
• False statements to private entities that acting on behalf of or insured by a federal agency.

To be convicted of False Statements the Government does not have to show the following:

• That the false statement was submitted directly to the federal government.
• That the government suffered a financial loss.
• That the government made some decision favorable to the defendant based on the false statement.
• The defendant had actual knowledge of the federal agency’s jurisdiction.
• The false statement was written or sworn to.

While every case is different, there are five primary defenses that a defendant can raise in a False Statements case:

• The statement was not false. The most straightforward defense is to show that the statement in question was in fact true.
• The statement was in response to an ambiguous question. Some government forms are less than clear. If the statement in question is not clear, the government must negate any reasonable interpretation that could make the statement accurate.
• The defendant did not know the statement was false. The government has to prove that the defendant knew the statement was false. If the defendant believed that the statement was true (e.g., someone had told him that the statement was accurate) or if the defendant made an honest mistake (e.g., mistakenly putting the wrong number on a complex form), there can be no conviction. For example, in PPP cases, small business owners who were unfamiliar with government aid programs were attempting to fill out complicated forms in a time of extreme stress. In many cases, they believed that they were inputting correct numbers.
• The statement was not material. The statute only criminalizes false statements that were material in nature. While a jury gets to determine whether something is material, most courts agree that materiality exists when the statement had the capacity to influence the government agency. For example, submission of a false name on a passport application would be considered material. The real question is whether the statement had some weight in the agency’s decision-making process.
• Jurisdictional Requirement. The Government has to show that the agency had the authority to take some action. In some cases, the statement in question is made to a private entity, and the defense can argue that no federal agency was empowered to take any action based on the statement.