SEC Investigations · Wells Notices · Securities Litigation
From a first contact by Enforcement staff to a Wells notice or parallel DOJ
inquiry, SEC investigations move quickly and quietly. Early, disciplined
defense work is the difference between a closed file and a charged case.
If you have received a letter, a subpoena, or a phone call from the Securities and Exchange Commission, something has already triggered scrutiny. The SEC does not open investigations at random. By the time a company insider, broker, investment adviser, or executive is contacted, SEC staff usually believes they already have a reason to look closer.
We defend individuals and companies facing SEC scrutiny in federal matters nationwide. Our attorneys include a former Assistant U.S. Attorney who has trained federal agents and prosecutors for the FBI, IRS, DEA, and DOJ, and who has been recognized for work on white-collar investigations involving the IRS, Homeland Security, and the FBI. That background matters here, because SEC cases often move alongside — or turn into — criminal referrals handled by the same federal agencies.
If your matter is tied to the Southern District of Texas, our Houston SEC fraud defense lawyers can help you respond before an inquiry turns into a charged case
This page explains how SEC fraud investigations start, how they unfold, what separates civil enforcement from criminal prosecution, and what an experienced defense attorney does at each stage.
If you are already under investigation or have received a Wells notice, do not wait to bring in counsel. Contact our office to talk with an attorney before you respond to the SEC.
The SEC’s Division of Enforcement investigates violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, along with related rules issued under those statutes. Most fraud allegations trace back to two anti-fraud provisions: Section 17(a) of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, enforced through Rule 10b-5. These provisions prohibit material misstatements, omissions, and deceptive schemes connected to the purchase or sale of securities.
Insider trading allegations involve buying or selling securities based on material, nonpublic information, or passing that information to someone else who trades on it. The SEC looks closely at trading patterns around earnings announcements, mergers, and other corporate events. An allegation can reach officers, directors, employees, and people several steps removed from the original source of the information.
These cases involve allegations that a public company’s financial statements misrepresented revenue, expenses, assets, or liabilities. The SEC’s Division of Enforcement has a dedicated group that reviews financial reporting and works with auditors, whistleblowers, and internal company records to identify discrepancies.
The SEC pursues cases where investor funds are used to pay earlier investors rather than generate real returns, or where an investment’s risks and structure were misrepresented to attract capital. These cases frequently overlap with criminal wire fraud and mail fraud charges brought by the DOJ.
This category covers a wide range of conduct, from overstating a company’s prospects in offering documents to omitting conflicts of interest in a broker-dealer or investment adviser relationship. Many enforcement actions against advisers and brokers begin here.
SEC investigations move through a defined sequence. Knowing where you are in that sequence changes what your attorney should be doing on your behalf.
Investigations used to start with a whistleblower and a stack of paper. That is no longer the typical starting point.
The SEC’s Market Abuse Unit and its data analytics programs now screen trading activity across the market for patterns — trades placed right before news breaks, timing that lines up too closely with corporate announcements, or activity that does not match how a person normally trades. A pattern like that alone can be enough to open a file.
That shift matters if you trade securities or work around material nonpublic information. The assumption that no one will notice unless someone complains no longer holds. By the time a formal order or subpoena shows up, the SEC may have already reviewed months or years of trading history.
We see two mistakes more than any others once someone suspects they are under scrutiny.
The first is destroying or altering records — trading records, emails, texts, or anything connected to the questions being asked. Cleaning up files does not make the underlying issue disappear. It creates a second, separate problem: obstruction. Obstruction can be easier for the government to prove than the original securities violation, because it can show exactly what existed, what was deleted, and when.
The second mistake is ignoring the problem and hoping it resolves on its own. While that happens, investigators keep working — reviewing trading records, pulling communications, and talking to witnesses. The case moves forward even when nothing feels urgent on the outside. By the time it feels real, the government is often much further along than most people realize.
Preserving records properly, and producing them strategically through counsel, can work in your favor and create leverage. Destroying them removes one of the few advantages you actually have.
If you think you may already be a subject of an SEC inquiry or a related DOJ investigation, a few steps matter more than the rest:
SEC staff can open what is internally called a Matter Under Inquiry before any formal investigation exists. At this stage, staff may request documents or an informal interview on a voluntary basis. There is no subpoena power yet, but how you and your counsel respond here often shapes everything that follows.
If staff believes further inquiry is warranted, the Commission issues a formal order of investigation. This order gives SEC enforcement attorneys subpoena power to compel documents and sworn testimony. Receiving notice of a formal order is a signal that the matter is being taken seriously.
Once a formal order is in place, the SEC can subpoena documents, emails, trading records, and testimony from the target of the investigation and from third parties, including employers, brokers, and business partners. Responding to a subpoena requires care — both to comply with legal obligations and to avoid volunteering information beyond the subpoena’s scope.
If, after reviewing the evidence, SEC staff decides to recommend an enforcement action, they typically issue a Wells notice. This notice tells you that staff intends to recommend that the Commission authorize charges, and it identifies the provisions staff believes were violated. A Wells notice is not a final decision — the Commission itself has not yet voted on charges — but it is a serious signal.
You generally have the opportunity to respond in writing before the Commission votes on whether to authorize an enforcement action. This response, called a Wells submission, is your attorney’s opportunity to argue against charges, dispute the staff’s legal theory, or push for reduced allegations. A well-prepared Wells submission can influence whether the case proceeds, what charges are recommended, or how it eventually resolves.
After the Wells process, the matter typically resolves one of three ways: the SEC closes the investigation without action, the parties negotiate a settlement (often without admitting or denying the findings), or the SEC files suit in federal court or brings an administrative proceeding before an SEC administrative law judge.
If you have received a Wells notice, the response window is limited and the content of your submission matters. Speak with our team before that deadline passes.
This is one of the most misunderstood parts of an SEC matter, and it is often the most consequential.
The SEC itself is a civil regulatory agency. It cannot file criminal charges. When the SEC pursues an enforcement action, it can seek civil penalties, injunctions, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and industry or officer-and-director bars — but not prison time.
Criminal securities fraud is prosecuted separately by the Department of Justice, often working with the FBI. The SEC and DOJ frequently investigate the same underlying conduct at the same time, in what are called parallel proceedings. The SEC can refer evidence to the DOJ, and DOJ prosecutors can bring criminal charges under the Securities Exchange Act or general federal fraud statutes while the SEC’s civil case proceeds on its own track.
In a parallel proceeding, a person can face an SEC civil case and a DOJ criminal case built on the same facts at the same time. Testimony or documents given in the civil matter can be used in the criminal matter. This is why statements made early in an SEC inquiry — even informal ones — carry real weight later.
For years, corporate fraud enforcement centered on the company — fines, settlements, corporate liability. That focus has shifted.
The Department of Justice’s current approach puts more weight on individuals: executives, decision-makers, the people who approved what happened, not just the entity they worked for.
DOJ policy also puts real weight on timing. Coming forward with information before the government finds the issue independently can open up options that are not available once investigators get there first. Once the government identifies the problem on its own, you are no longer deciding how to handle it. You are reacting to what has already been found.
The SEC has its own version of this dynamic. The Commission has long applied policies that give credit for self-reporting and cooperation in civil enforcement matters. The specific benefit varies case by case and is decided by SEC staff and the Commission, but the underlying principle mirrors DOJ’s approach: how and when you come forward can matter as much as what happened.
A defense strategy built only around the civil case can create serious exposure if a criminal referral is already in motion, or becomes one later. Attorneys who understand both sides of federal white-collar enforcement — civil and criminal — are positioned to account for that risk from the first phone call, not after charges are filed.
Civil penalties. Monetary fines imposed by a federal court or through settlement, calculated based on the violation and any gain from the conduct.
Disgorgement. Repayment of profits or losses avoided as a result of the alleged violation, plus interest.
Injunctions. Court orders barring future violations of securities laws.
Officer and director bars. Orders prohibiting a person from serving as an officer or director of a public company.
Industry bars. Suspension or permanent bar from working as a broker, investment adviser, or in another regulated securities role.
Criminal exposure. If the conduct is referred to or independently pursued by the DOJ, penalties can include federal imprisonment and criminal fines, in addition to any civil consequences.
The specific penalties in any matter depend on the allegations, the evidence, and how the case is resolved. No outcome can be guaranteed at the outset of a matter, and anyone who tells you otherwise before reviewing your case is not being straight with you.
If SEC allegations lead to a DOJ criminal case, sentencing does not follow SEC penalty schedules. It follows the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, which use a point-based system to calculate a recommended range. Understanding how that system works matters early, because decisions made during the investigation can affect sentencing exposure later.
General securities fraud — accounting fraud, Ponzi schemes, and misrepresentation to investors — is sentenced under USSG §2B1.1, the same guideline used for most federal fraud offenses. It starts at a base offense level of 7.
From that starting point, the court adds levels for specific factors connected to the offense: the dollar amount of loss, whether there were 10 or more victims (an increase of 2 levels) or 50 or more victims (an increase of 4 levels), and whether the offense involved sophisticated means. These additions stack. A case that starts at a modest base offense level of 7 can climb into the mid-20s once loss amount and enhancements are added together, and that difference can be the gap between a much shorter sentence and a much longer one.
Sophisticated means is one of the enhancements prosecutors reach for most often. It does not require an elaborate criminal scheme. Courts applying this enhancement have found that simply moving money between multiple accounts to mask its source can be enough, even without any special technical complexity.
Because securities fraud schemes often involve multiple entities, shell companies, or layered transactions moving investor funds, this enhancement comes up frequently in these cases. Defense arguments typically focus on showing the entities involved served a legitimate business or tax purpose, that the transfers were simple and repetitive rather than a layered scheme, or that the conduct does not compare to the kind of complexity the enhancement was designed to address.
Under §2B1.1, the loss amount does most of the work in setting the sentencing range. But the government’s loss calculation is not automatically correct. It is typically built from a spreadsheet of assumptions, and those assumptions can be challenged.
Areas worth examining closely include credits against loss for any actual services, value, or collateral provided; double-counting of the same dollars across multiple investors or victims; and speculative intended-loss figures that assume the largest possible number rather than one supported by the facts. Reducing the loss figure, even by a modest amount, can change the applicable sentencing range.
Securities fraud, especially Ponzi and investment schemes, often involves many investors, so victim-count enhancements matter. The offense level increases for 10 or more victims, and increases further for 50 or more.
The definition of “victim” under the guidelines is broad, and anyone temporarily affected can potentially be counted. That makes it important to review the victim list closely for duplicate entries, people who were already reimbursed, or losses actually caused by something unrelated to the charged conduct.
To see how these components combine, consider a general fraud example unrelated to securities: a loan fraud case might start at a base offense level of 7, then climb significantly once the loss amount is added, and further still if enhancements such as sophisticated means apply. Successfully challenging even one enhancement, combined with acceptance of responsibility, can bring the final offense level down substantially — sometimes from the low twenties to roughly level 18 or 19. That kind of difference in offense level translates directly into years of federal prison exposure, not months.
Insider trading is not sentenced the same way as general securities fraud. Instead of §2B1.1, it falls under USSG §2B1.4 — recently redesignated §2B1.5 in the newest guidelines manual — which starts at a base offense level of 8 and is built around gain rather than loss.
Under this guideline, the court looks at what the defendant, or the people who traded on the tip, actually gained, or the loss they avoided, rather than what any victim lost. That gain figure is then run through the same dollar table used in general fraud cases, just applied to gain instead of loss.
This distinction matters in practice. In general fraud sentencing, the guidelines separate actual loss from intended loss, and the government will often argue for the larger, intended figure. As a hypothetical example, if someone attempted to move $5 million out of an account but a technical failure limited what actually transferred to $50, the government would likely still argue for sentencing based on the $5 million intended, not the $50 actually taken. Insider trading works on a parallel logic, but the number being measured is gain, not loss — which is why it is treated as its own guideline rather than folded entirely into §2B1.1.
If you are facing potential criminal exposure connected to an SEC matter, understanding which guideline applies — and what is actually driving the number — is part of building a defense from the start. Talk with our team about where your matter stands.
Hypothetical Example: The Investment Adviser and a Trading Pattern. An investment adviser at a small firm places trades in a client account shortly before a public announcement moves the stock. The SEC’s market surveillance flags the trading pattern and opens an informal inquiry, requesting trading records and communications. Depending on what those records show, the matter could close quietly or escalate to a formal order and subpoenas for testimony.
Hypothetical Example: The CFO and Quarterly Reporting. A company’s chief financial officer approves a reporting method that overstates quarterly revenue. An internal whistleblower flags the issue, and the SEC’s Division of Enforcement opens a formal investigation into the company and individual officers. Because financial fraud of this kind can also involve mail or wire fraud theories, the company’s outside counsel and the individual executives may need separate representation, and a related criminal referral becomes a real possibility.
These examples are illustrative only and do not reflect any actual client matter.
During an informal inquiry. Counsel can manage communications with SEC staff, control what is voluntarily produced, and assess early whether the matter is likely to escalate.
When a formal order and subpoenas arrive. Counsel reviews the subpoena’s scope, negotiates timing and format for document production, and prepares any witness for testimony under oath.
At the Wells notice stage. Counsel drafts the Wells submission, which requires translating the factual record and legal defenses into an argument the Commission will actually consider before authorizing charges.
In settlement negotiations. Counsel negotiates the terms of any consent decree, including penalty amounts, admissions language, and the scope of any industry bar.
In litigation. If the matter proceeds to federal court or an administrative proceeding, counsel handles discovery, motions, and trial or hearing preparation.
When criminal exposure exists. Counsel with federal criminal defense and former prosecutorial experience can assess whether the conduct at issue could draw DOJ interest, and can coordinate a strategy that accounts for both the civil and criminal tracks at the same time.
Our firm’s managing partner, Russell Lorfing, is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney who prosecuted federal cases in Lubbock, Texas, and was designated a Cyber Hacking Intellectual Property Prosecutor by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in 2017. He has trained federal agents and prosecutors for the FBI, IRS, DEA, and DOJ, and has been recognized nationally for his work on white-collar investigations involving the IRS, Homeland Security, and the FBI. In 2024, he served as Co-Chair of the Federal Criminal Defense Committee for the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association. He is admitted to practice in Texas, the District of Columbia, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Northern, Western, and Southern Districts of Texas, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Founding partner Trey Keith has spent more than 20 years defending clients accused of federal and state crimes, including financial crimes such as money laundering, with a track record that includes not-guilty verdicts in those cases. The Honorable E. Scott Frost (Ret.), Of Counsel to the firm, brings more than 30 years of experience on the federal bench.
Beyond our named partners, our broader team includes former federal prosecutors, former federal public defenders, former FBI agents, and former IRS criminal investigators. That range of backgrounds means we have approached federal fraud and securities matters from more than one side of the table — as investigators, as defenders, and, in Judge Frost’s case, from the bench.
We also work with companies and individuals before an SEC inquiry ever starts, reviewing trading controls, disclosure practices, and compliance systems so problems surface internally instead of through a subpoena.
SEC enforcement is federal law, and it applies the same way regardless of where you live or work. Our team’s experience is built around federal court practice and federal white-collar investigations, which is the experience an SEC matter actually calls for.
If your matter involves federal program funds, government contracts, or whistleblower-driven allegations, it may also overlap with the False Claims Act. Our False Claims Act & Qui Tam Defense page covers how those cases work alongside securities and fraud investigations.
Do I need a lawyer if the SEC contacts me informally?
Yes. Even an informal request for documents or an interview can shape the rest of an investigation. Statements and documents given early are part of the record the SEC relies on later, so it helps to have counsel involved before you respond.
What is a Wells notice, exactly?
A Wells notice is a written notification from SEC staff that they intend to recommend the Commission authorize an enforcement action against you. It identifies the securities laws staff believes were violated and gives you an opportunity to respond in writing, called a Wells submission, before the Commission votes.
Can the SEC send me to prison?
No. The SEC is a civil regulatory agency and can only pursue civil remedies such as penalties, disgorgement, injunctions, and industry bars. Criminal securities fraud charges, which can carry prison time, are brought separately by the Department of Justice, sometimes based on the same conduct the SEC is investigating.
How long does an SEC investigation typically last?
Timelines vary widely depending on the complexity of the trading activity, financial records, or corporate transactions involved, and on how many witnesses and third parties are involved. Some inquiries close within months; others take years, particularly when a formal order and multiple subpoenas are involved.
What should I do if I receive an SEC subpoena?
Do not respond or produce documents without legal counsel. A subpoena defines specific categories of documents or testimony, and how you respond can affect both the scope of the investigation and your legal exposure going forward.
Will my SEC case turn into a criminal case?
Not every SEC matter leads to a criminal referral, but some do, particularly cases involving alleged fraud, Ponzi schemes, or deliberate misrepresentation. An attorney familiar with both civil SEC enforcement and federal criminal defense can evaluate that risk early and plan accordingly.
Should my company and I have separate attorneys in an SEC investigation?
Often, yes. A company and its individual officers or employees can have different interests once an investigation identifies specific people as potential targets, and separate counsel avoids a conflict of interest.
If you are facing an SEC inquiry, subpoena, or Wells notice, the earlier you involve counsel, the more options you typically have. Schedule a consultation with our federal defense team to talk through where your matter stands and what comes next.
Speak with our federal investigations team confidentially.
24/7 Crisis Line: 325-480-8100
Engagements nationwide
The Team
Partner
Russell Lorfing Former Federal Prosecutor
Partner
Brandi Young Former Federal Prosecutor
Partner
David Sloan Former Federal Defender
He put his trial skills to work in the courtroom, prosecuting cases for Ellis County and the District Attorney’s office in Waxahachie. His skills were recognized by the trial lawyers around him, and he went from a misdemeanor prosecutor to lead counsel on murder trials in less than three years.
Of Counsel
C. Richard Baker Former Assistant United States Attorney
Of Counsel
Hon. Scott Frost (Ret.) Former Federal Judge
Keith served as an FBI Special Agent in Lubbock for 27 years, focusing on human trafficking, crimes against children, and terrorism. Known for his collaborative leadership and relentless pursuit of justice, he now brings his expertise to our firm as Special Investigator.
Of Counsel
Eric Gerard Former Federal Prosecutor
Keith served as an FBI Special Agent in Lubbock for 27 years, focusing on human trafficking, crimes against children, and terrorism. Known for his collaborative leadership and relentless pursuit of justice, he now brings his expertise to our firm as Special Investigator.
Of Counsel
Chris Solis Former Federal Prosecutor
Senior Associate
Shane Chriesman Former Federal Prosecutor
Strategic Advisor
Javier Rocha Family Office Executive & Attorney
A family office executive and attorney with over a decade leading privately held businesses and executive teams across complex organizations. His career has focused on governance, investments, operations, and long-term stewardship for family office functions involving billions in assets, advising billion-dollar enterprises on internal investigations, investment diligence, and succession planning. Serves as Board of Directors Chairman for Heritage School and Assistant Scoutmaster for Troop 137.
Advisors & Investigators
A bench of former federal agents, prosecutors, and senior advisors who provide investigative
depth and strategic counsel on the firm’s most complex matters.
Strategic Investigator
Arthur Gonzales Former FBI Supervisory Special Agent
Nearly three decades with the FBI in leadership roles spanning counterterrorism, organized crime, and financial crimes. Recognized nationally and internationally for expertise in complex federal investigations, crisis management, and undercover operations, and served as an instructor at the FBI Academy. Provides strategic consulting and investigative support in federal criminal defense and white-collar investigations.
Strategic Investigator
Michael Orndorff Retired FBI Special Agent
Strategic Investigator
Travis Thorson Retired IRS-CI Special Agent & FBI Task Force Officer
Over two decades of federal investigative experience focused on complex financial crimes, money laundering, and organized criminal enterprises. A former IRS Special Agent whose forensic accounting work was critical in tracing illicit financial activity and building federal prosecutions. Provides strategic consulting for federal criminal defense, forensic accounting, and money laundering investigations.
Special Investigator
Keith Quigley Former FBI Special Agent
Keith served as an FBI Special Agent in Lubbock for 27 years, focusing on human trafficking, crimes against children, and terrorism. Known for his collaborative leadership and relentless pursuit of justice, he now brings his expertise to our firm as Special Investigator.
Strategic Investigator
Jenifer Sparks Retired FBI Special Agent & Certified Profiler
Nearly three decades of FBI experience specializing in violent crime investigations, behavioral analysis, and crimes against children. Served as a Special Agent, Supervisory Special Agent Profiler, and Coordinator of the FBI’s Child Exploitation Task Force. Provides strategic consulting in federal criminal defense, human trafficking investigations, witness credibility assessment, and behavioral analysis.
Strategic Investigator
Jennifer Cejpek Former FBI Special Agent & Certified Fraud Examiner
More than two decades of federal investigative and intelligence experience specializing in healthcare fraud, financial crimes, and public corruption. As a former FBI Special Agent, she led complex federal investigations in close coordination with the Department of Justice. Background includes service as an Electronic Warfare and Intelligence Analyst in the U.S. Army and expertise in forensic interviewing. Advises on federal criminal defense, white-collar crime, and compliance matters.
Strategic Advisor
William Luttrell Financial Analyst & CPA
Financial analyst and Certified Public Accountant advising the firm on complex financial matters, forensic accounting, and the analysis of records central to federal white-collar and financial crime defense.
Recognition
Internal Revenue Service
For prosecutorial accomplishments on financial investigations
National Recognition
Recognized nationally for white-collar investigations work
U.S. Department of Justice
Decades of distinguished service at the U.S. Department of Justice
Combined Team Experience
Combined experience across DOJ, FBI, and the federal bench
Accolades & Accreditations
Client Reviews
I had a dear family friend retain Russell behind some very serious criminal charges. Russell listened and maintained contact through the whole process to assure he felt comfortable and in the loop. With Russell’s help, the case/investigation was dismissed and innocence ensured. We are so grateful for Russell’s dedication and professionalism. Would definitely recommend
Our personal experience could not have been better. These attorneys worked diligently and stayed in constant contact with us regarding the developments in our case. We always had the final say in any offers made by the prosecution. If I could only say one thing about them it would be “they listen” I always felt that my opinion was heard and considered. We discussed everything good and bad. When a decision was finally agreed on we felt it was the very best and truthfully an almost unbelievable outcome. I never want to find my family in the midst or subject of a criminal case ever again but if it happens my first and only call will be to this law firm. Big thanks to Russell and Chris on a job well done. And the office staff are simply amazing! Always polite, knowledgeable, and professional. Thank you all for treating us as family and working so hard to bring this case to a great conclusion.
I had a legal case that was difficult for me, and Russell Lorfing was very helpful throughout the process, advocating for me and working with me throughout the whole process. He was quite accessible as well whether by phone or email, and his staff was also quite helpful to reach out to. Russell was very systematic in going through the evidence that we had in building a case and gave pragmatic explanations on his views considering all the evidence. He also gave me the confidence several times during the process that the evidence for my case was sufficient in building a strong defense. I appreciate very much that he did not sugarcoat my situation and was patient in addressing concerns I had along the way. I strongly recommend Russell for anyone going through a difficult legal battle.
Russell was representing another client in federal court and my family saw him in action and we immediately fired our lawyer and hired Russell on the spot. One of the best decisions we’ve ever made. My brother’s case was very serious as he was looking at 40 years Fed for distribution of methamphetamine. Russell is very connected and well respected when it comes to law. He has great history in the courts with judges and prosecutors. Russell will not sell you a dream—he will shoot you straight and will not sugar coat anything. Russell was able to get my brother’s sentence cut in HALF to something way more reasonable.
Russell Lorfing is THE guy you hire if you’ve been charged with a federal crime in West Texas. My fiancé was charged with a serious federal charge and we needed an experienced defense lawyer. He is one of the most honest lawyers you will find—he tells you exactly how things are and answers your questions honestly. He was looking at 13+ years, and now is looking at 5 years thanks to Mr. Lorfing, who did not rest until he was able to get him something better.
My son is on State and Federal Parole. He was in a lot of trouble that could have landed him in prison for many years. Russell took my son’s case and has done a great job. Russell was able to get the state charges against my son dismissed—my son was looking at a minimum of twenty-five years. Russell also got my son a great plea deal with my son’s federal case. The Keith & Lorfing team treated us as if we were family. I recommend Keith & Lorfing to everybody.
My entire experience with Keith and Lorfing has been great. I was facing the possibility of a 15 year MINIMUM sentence. Mr. Lorfing was very honest and made no promises but he reassured me that his main goal was to keep me out of prison. He did just that and I was able to sign for 6 years probation instead. I highly recommend Keith and Lorfing for anyone in need of a confident and experienced defense attorney.
My husband and I had a great experience working with Russell Lorfing. He managed to get my brother-in-law’s federal case dismissed in a short period of time. Mr. Lorfing is caring and is in constant contact with you and your family. He is a great federal defense lawyer. He is highly recommended!
I wanted to express my deepest gratitude for the incredible support and expertise you provided to my family member. Your dedication and hard work made a world of difference during a challenging time. Thank you for going above and beyond to ensure the best possible outcome. We will strongly encourage anyone that is experiencing any case to consider Russell Lorfing Esq. to represent them.
At the first of our situation we were scared and didn’t know where to begin. My wife made a phone call to Keith & Lorfing just to see where to begin—turned out to be the best decision! Russell and Chris from Keith & Lorfing were absolute professionals. They were the smartest and most prepared in the courtroom. Extremely impressed! They gave us our life back and could not thank them enough for what they did!
I had the privilege of working with Keith and Lorfing for my criminal defense case, and I cannot recommend them highly enough. From the initial consultation to the courtroom proceedings, Keith and Lorfing demonstrated a deep understanding of the law and a commitment to protecting my rights. Thanks to their diligent efforts and sharp legal acumen, they successfully navigated the complexities of my case and ultimately secured a dismissal.
Russell was recommended to me by several people and we are so lucky to have found him! He was able to get a potential 7 year sentence down to only 9 months. Not to mention he and everyone at the law firm was so kind and helpful. It felt more like a family than a law firm. Would recommend to anyone who is in a tough spot.
A referral that I am very glad I was given. Not only did he meet the expectations I had heard from the referral, but exceeded them beyond measure. The process was simple and I was very comfortable and confident throughout. Mr. Lorfing and his associates are amazing and helpful. 10/10 recommended for their honesty and assistance.
Absolutely the best lawyer and staff I’ve ever met. He was more concerned with telling me the facts of where I stood legally than taking my case just for his financial gain. If I ever need any more legal help, I will go to their firm.
I am truly thankful for all you have done for me and my case. My family and I greatly appreciate everything you have done. I am greatly and truly impressed with the outcome. You were great at getting the answers for any question I had and explaining what everything meant. You are very outstanding and have done an amazing job. Thank you so much Russell!
Russell did an amazing job. My case truly was a hail Mary. Lots of threading the needle and moving parts was an understatement. It’s a true testament that if someone wants to really change and will help him help themselves, he can and will.
Russell was an incredible advocate for my family. He regularly communicated with us and made us feel like we were his priority. My brother was looking at a mandatory minimum ten years in federal prison with a maximum possible sentence of life. He ended up pleading to a much less serious crime and serving less than a year. If you’ve been charged with a federal crime in West Texas, Russell Lorfing is THE ATTORNEY you hire.
After I was initially charged, I was swimming in a pool of despair. After my initial intake appointment there was a welcoming presence and a pedigree of honesty with my circumstances. Nothing was sugarcoated but they never made me feel like what I wanted was out of question. I couldn’t be more thrilled about the outcome—Keith literally reached into the depths of the justice system and pulled me out untarnished.
Thank you Mr. Lorfing for your work getting my family member’s Federal MTR Dismissed. We know the time crunch made communication difficult so a special shout out to his legal assistant Wendi as well for getting back with me and reassuring our family things were getting done behind the scenes. We couldn’t have asked for a better outcome.
Mr. Lorfing is AMAZING! He is truly a miracle worker! My brother got into deep trouble, so we contacted the best lawyer to represent him. While most lawyers bring up payment options first, he listened to our story first. Mr. Lorfing resolved it before it got way worse and treated us like family. The Lorfing Law Firm is the way to go. He saved my brother and saved my family from heartaches.
Mr. Lorfing is different. He really cares about justice being served. He did a wonderful job with my son as his client. Mr. Lorfing doesn’t accept the usual outcomes of a case. He delves into all possibilities and outcomes for his clients and puts forth great effort when representing his clients. He is a very good lawyer.
I had a complicated case and this man really did his job—and did it in no time. I’m so happy with his professionalism and empathy towards me. He really had my back. Thank you Mr. Lorfing.
Confidential Consultation
Early strategic intervention can significantly impact the course of a federal investigation. Contact our investigations team for a confidential consultation.