Facing Federal Drug Conspiracy Charges?

Under 21 U.S.C. § 846, it’s a federal crime to conspire to violate federal drug laws, even if the conduct itself was not completed. The government must prove:

• An agreement among two or more people,

• Knowledge and intent of at least one conspirator,
• And at least one overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy

This differs from general conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 371 because § 846 attaches directly to the underlying drug offense, often carrying significantly harsher mandatory penalties.

How Federal Drug Conspiracy Differs From State Charges

Federal charges carry stricter sentencing rules and less judicial discretion than NY State charges. Judges are typically required to impose mandatory minimums unless successfully challenged through specific arguments.

Under New York State law, drug conspiracy may be charged as a state-level conspiracy (NY Penal Law §§ 105.15–.20). For example, a second-degree (Class B felony) conspiracy may result in up to 25 years prison, probation, or substantial fines—but no mandatory minimums like in federal court.

How We Fight Federal Drug Conspiracy Charges

Federal drug conspiracy charges under 21 U.S.C. § 846 present significant challenges but offer multiple defense strategies that experienced attorneys can employ. Any person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this subchapter shall be subject to the same penalties as those prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the attempt or conspiracy.

The most effective defense strategies include

• No Conspiracy Defense: One of the most effective defenses is to challenge the very existence of a conspiracy. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was an agreement between two or more people to commit a drug-related offense. If there is insufficient evidence to establish this agreement, the conspiracy charge cannot stand. Courts require more than casual discussions or speculation to establish an agreement.
• Lack of Knowledge or Intent Defense: In order to prove a conspiracy charge, the government must prove that you had knowledge of the illegal nature of the conspiracy and intended to join in it. This means that an experienced attorney may be able to prove that you were unaware that your actions were illegal and that you did not intend to participate in the conspiracy
• Specific Intent Standard: The Supreme Court has ruled that a defendant must have specific intent to join and further the criminal enterprise (United States v. Falcone, 311 U.S. 205 (1940)), the Court held that selling goods to a known conspirator does not establish participation unless there is evidence the seller knew of and intended to further the conspiracy's objectives
• Affirmative Withdrawal Requirements: Withdrawing from a conspiracy is a defense to a conspiracy, but it's not enough to simply throw one's hands up and say: "I quit." In order to succeed with a withdrawal defense, a person has to have been pro-active in withdrawing from the conspiracy. This means showing that they took an affirmative action to stop participating in the conspiracy, that they informed your co-conspirators of their withdrawal, and that they withdrew before the conspiracy was complete.

Challenging a federal drug conspiracy charge requires scrutinizing the government's evidence of an agreement. Since conspiracy charges often rely on circumstantial proof, an experienced attorney will analyze phone records, financial transactions, and witness testimony. If the alleged agreement is based on ambiguous conversations or indirect associations, the defense can argue that no actual conspiracy existed.

• Circumstantial Evidence Challenges: Circumstantial evidence plays a major role in conspiracy prosecutions, including patterns of communication, financial transactions, travel records, or witness testimony. Defense attorneys can challenge this evidence by demonstrating that communications were ambiguous, financial transactions had legitimate purposes, or that the defendant's presence was coincidental rather than conspiratorial.
• Cooperating Witness Issues: The credibility of cooperating witnesses plays a major role in drug conspiracy trials. Prosecutors frequently rely on informants or co-defendants who testify in exchange for reduced sentences. These witnesses often have incentives to exaggerate or fabricate details. Cross-examining them to expose inconsistencies, prior dishonesty, or motivations for testifying can cast doubt on their reliability
• Constitutional Challenges to Evidence: In many drug conspiracy cases, the evidence presented by the prosecution may be circumstantial. For instance, the government may rely on phone records, surveillance footage, or informant testimony to link a defendant to a drug conspiracy. The defense may challenge the credibility or reliability of this evidence to undermine the prosecution’s case.
• Burden of Proof: The government must prove all elements of a federal drug conspiracy charge beyond a reasonable doubt. If the defense can show that there is insufficient evidence to establish any of the required elements—such as an agreement, knowledge, or overt acts—the charges may be reduced or dropped
• Fourth Amendment Violations: In certain federal drug crime cases, motions to suppress based on violations of your Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth amendment rights are often necessary to make a challenge against the prosecutor's case. If successful, it could exclude key evidence against you at trial.
• Wiretap Challenges: Wiretaps and Surveillance: Conversations or actions caught on tape. An attorney can challenge the validity and reliability of this evidence by arguing that the wiretaps were improperly authorized.
• Search and Seizure Issues: Ane experienced attorney can help navigate federal court procedures, including pretrial motions to suppress unlawfully obtained evidence. Given the potential for lengthy prison sentences and financial penalties, defendants need legal advocates who understand federal sentencing guidelines, forfeiture laws, and potential defenses.

Possible Sentencing & Penalties in New York

Sentencing typically starts with base offense level points determined by the federal sentencing guidelines. Crimes carrying statutory maximums of 20 years often begin with 6–7 base points. These are then adjusted upward for quantities, involvement, prior convictions, and other enhancements (such as death/injury).

Sentences also consider whether there was serious injury or death as a result of the drugs, which triggers life or near‑life penalties. Sentences can double or exceed standard ranges under these circumstances.

Consequently, mandatory minimum sentences depend heavily on the type and quantity of the drug involved. Even small amounts can trigger significant prison time when intent to distribute is alleged. Without quantity allegations, marijuana conspiracies may lead to up to 20 years, with minimums of 5 or 10 years if thresholds are met.

Substantial quantities of controlled substances (e.g. hundreds of grams of fentanyl, methamphetamine, heroin) often carry mandatory minimums of 5–10 years, escalating to 10 years to life or life without parole depending on death or injury related to drug use.

Also, prior drug felony convictions under 21 U.S.C. § 851 can significantly raise mandatory minimums, particularly for repeat offenders.

In kingpin-like cases, under the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) statute, defendants face a mandatory minimum of 20 years up to life imprisonment, plus substantial fines and forfeiture

Examples and Related Cases

Our office has successfully defended various individuals charged with conspiracy and federal drug violations.

Very recently, we handled a matter in the Southern District of New York, whereby an individual was charged following an undercover operation. Our client not only possessed the requisite amount of narcotics but also a firearm, which in turn called for a significant enhancement in his guidelines.

Nonetheless, through a persuasive mitigation package and tireless advocacy, we convinced SDNY to offer our client a favorable resolution to a 21 USC 841(b)(1)(C) violation. With this, our client faced a lower guideline and a lower mandatory minimum than other similarly situated individuals.

Moreover, at a complex sentencing hearing, we convinced a district court judge to issue a sentence well-below our clients’ guidelines range, effectively imposing only the mandatory minimum sentence. 

Major Drug Conspiracy Cases

Several landmark federal drug conspiracy cases continue to dominate legal discourse and serve as essential reference points for practitioners defending clients facing similar charges. The Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán case represents the most significant modern drug conspiracy prosecution, with Guzmán convicted on all 10 counts including being a principal leader of a continuing criminal enterprise, narcotics trafficking, using a firearm in furtherance of his drug crimes and participating in a money laundering conspiracy (United States v. Guzmán, 17 Cr. 274 (E.D.N.Y. 2019)].

• The evidence at trial established that Guzmán Loera was a principal leader of the Sinaloa Cartel, a Mexico-based international drug trafficking organization responsible for importing and distributing more than a million kilograms of cocaine, marijuana, methamphetamine and heroin in the United States

The Ross Ulbricht Silk Road case established critical precedents for digital drug conspiracies, with Ulbricht found guilty of one count of distributing narcotics, one count of distributing narcotics by means of the Internet, and one count of conspiring to distribute narcotics, each carrying a maximum sentence of life in prison and a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years (United States v. Ulbricht, 14 Cr. 68 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)).

• Silk Road, a hidden website designed to enable its users to buy and sell illegal drugs and other unlawful goods and services anonymously and beyond the reach of law enforcement.Ulbricht created Silk Road in approximately January 2011, and owned and operated the underground website until it was shut down by law enforcement authorities in October 2013.

The recent 2025 Western District of Missouri case demonstrates current enforcement priorities, with 13 defendants indicted for conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, with investigators seizing approximately 40 kilograms of methamphetamine, two kilograms of cocaine, and 11 firearms during an investigation that began in January 2024 and continued through June 2025 (United States v. Lopez-Farias, et al., Case No. 4:25-cr-00 (W.D. Mo. 2025)

• The investigation began in January of 2024 and continued through June of 2025, during which time investigators seized approximately 40 kilograms of methamphetamine, two kilograms of cocaine, and 11 firearms, three of which had been equipped with machine gun conversion devices and functioned as fully automatic weapons.

Your Defense Begins Now

If you or a loved one has been charged with federal drug conspiracy, an experienced criminal defense attorney can help you navigate the legal complexities of your case. Don’t face the federal system alone. Contact The Law Offices of Jason Goldman today.