When facing serious criminal charges or a government investigation, an Osborn Maledon white collar criminal defense attorney can provide the appropriate representation and quality of expertise required. Through extensive, nationwide experience with grand jury procedures, federal and state court litigation, regulatory enforcement proceedings, and civil fraud cases, we've managed highly complex and wide-ranging investigations.
For this reason we purposely limit our case load to ensure that our lawyers are able to provide each client with the depth of service and specific focus necessary to resolve the government investigation in which they have been implicated. Whether the alleged offenses involve public corruption, securities, mortgage or health care fraud, financial crimes, cybercrimes, environmental crimes, or other alleged violations of state or federal law, we work closely with our clients to resolve matters as quickly and privately as possible.
Osborn Maledon white collar crime attorneys coordinate closely with our corporate and litigation attorneys to develop company specific compliance strategies and procedures aimed at eliminating potential regulatory issues. Should such issues arise, however, our attorneys have the experience to protect clients from forfeitures and other penalties. We've represented corporations, individual officers, directors and employees in both Federal and State criminal investigations and during internal investigations.
Our criminal defense attorneys provide clients facing serious criminal charges with thorough, creative, solution-oriented representation at all stages of a criminal matter, from pre-indictment through appeals, habeas corpus, and other extraordinary writ proceedings.
At Osborn Maledon our white collar criminal defense lawyers have been selected for their knowledge, experience and dedication to outstanding representation for both corporate clients and individuals. Their breadth of service, depth of involvement and quality of attention provides our clients with the most effective support at every stage and every level of litigation.
- Yaser Ali
- Maureen Beyers
- Kathleen E. Brody
- Colin F. Campbell
- Anne M. Chapman
- Chelsea Sage Durkin
- Timothy J. Eckstein
- Anna H. Finn
- Shane M. Ham
- Larry A. Hammond
- Joseph N. Roth
- Christina C. Rubalcava
- Osborn Maledon Practice Groups and Attorneys Ranked as Tops in Chambers Guide
- Osborn Maledon ranked in "Best Law Firms" 2013 by U.S. News Media Group and Best Lawyers®
- Four Osborn Maledon Partners Named 'Lawyer of the Year'
- Deferred Prosecution Agreements in the Financial services Industry: Trends and Tips
The Champion, June 2013
- Civil Discovery Standards Influence New Criminal Guidelines
Pretrial Practice & Discovery, 0:4© by the American Bar Association, Summer 2012
- Sentence Must be Fair: Death-Penalty Defendants Need Competent Attorneys
The Arizona Republic, May 12, 2012
- Capital Case Crisis in Maricopa County, Arizona: A response from the Defense
Judicature, March / April 2012
- Innocent Until Interrogated
Law Journal for Social Justice, May 2, 2011
- John Sears, John J. Flynn Lifetime Achievement Award 2011
The Defender, April 21, 2011
- Why Should You Oppose the Death Penalty?
The Arizona Republic, April 15, 2011
- Opinion: What Did Jeffrey Landrigan's Execution Teach Us About Respect?
Maricopa Lawyer, November 6, 2010
- Protecting Moscow from the Soviets -- Book Review
- Napolitano will Defend State Death Penalty Law before Supreme Court
The Arizona Republic, April 21, 2002
- Bashir v. Pineda, 226 Ariz. 351, 248 P.3d 199 (2011) (affirming prosecutor’s duty to provide relevant information to grand jury)
- State v. Bigger, 227 Ariz. 196, 254 P.3d 1142 (2011) (challenging admission of calculations of DNA-related testing and exclusion of third-party culpability evidence)
- State v. Botkin, 221 Ariz. 1, 209 P.3d 137 (2009) (statutory interpretation overturning court of appeals decision that would have required prison term)
- Koch v. Lewis, 216 F.Supp.2d 994 (D. Ariz. 2001) (due process and indefinite, solitary confinement), vacated as moot upon client’s release from custody, 399 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2005)
- State ex rel. Napolitano v. Gravano, 204 Ariz. 106, 60 P.3d 246 (App. 2002)