Connecticut federal money-laundering charges

Money-laundering charges in federal court are serious. They can trigger long prison terms, steep fines, asset forfeiture, and long-term collateral consequences (loss of employment, professional licenses, immigration consequences, etc.). This article explains the key federal statutes prosecutors use, the penalties those statutes carry, how cases typically proceed in the District of Connecticut, common defenses, and — finally — why Matthew Galluzzo is an excellent attorney to defend someone facing these charges.

The core federal statutes prosecutors use

18 U.S.C. § 1956 — Laundering of monetary instruments.
Section 1956 is the main money-laundering statute. It criminalizes conducting or attempting to conduct financial transactions knowing that the funds are proceeds of specified unlawful activity (or with intent to promote unlawful activity, conceal the source, or evade reporting requirements). Convictions under §1956 can carry significant prison terms and large fines.

18 U.S.C. § 1957 — Engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from specified unlawful activity.
Section 1957 makes it a crime to knowingly engage in monetary transactions (typically above $10,000) in criminally derived property. §1957 is often used alongside §1956 when prosecutors can show large dollar transactions of proceeds.

Forfeiture statutes — 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 & 982.
Money-laundering prosecutions commonly include forfeiture allegations. Section 981 authorizes civil forfeiture of property involved in or traceable to violations of §§1956 and 1957; §982 authorizes criminal forfeiture as part of sentencing. Forfeiture can mean loss of bank accounts, real estate, vehicles, and other assets the government traces to alleged criminal activity.

Typical penalties (what someone faces on conviction)

• Section 1956: Individuals convicted under §1956 face up to 20 years’ imprisonment, and fines — often the greater of statutory caps (for individuals, statutory fines or twice the value of property involved) — depending on the subsection and facts. Criminal forfeiture and other financial penalties are routinely sought.
• Section 1957: Convictions under §1957 carry up to 10 years’ imprisonment and substantial fines; courts may impose alternate fines of up to twice the amount of criminally derived property involved.
• Forfeiture: Both civil (administrative/court-ordered) and criminal forfeiture can be pursued under §981 and §982 — meaning defendants not only face prison and fines but also the potential permanent loss of assets tied to the alleged offense.

Note: Sentencing also depends on the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines, a defendant’s criminal history, the dollar amount involved, whether fraud or drugs are the underlying crime, and whether the defendant accepts responsibility or cooperates. The Department of Justice provides detailed guidance on applying §§1956 and 1957.

How a federal money-laundering case typically unfolds in the District of Connecticut

1. Investigation and arrest. Federal investigations are often multi-agency (FBI, IRS-CI, DEA, Homeland Security Investigations, or state partners). They may involve grand jury subpoenas, search warrants, wiretaps, and forensic accounting.
2. Indictment and charging. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut brings federal charges; indictments will set out the alleged transactions and statutory violations. The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut prosecutes these matters in the federal courthouses (New Haven, Hartford, or Bridgeport).
3. Pretrial litigation. Defense counsel can move to suppress evidence obtained in violation of the Constitution, challenge the sufficiency of the indictment, and litigate discovery disputes (including requests for financial records and the government’s evidence showing “knowing” or “intent”).
4. Resolution — plea or trial. Many federal cases resolve by plea agreements; others go to trial. Even when a plea is considered, strong defense work can reduce charges, limit forfeiture, or negotiate sentencing recommendations.

Common defense strategies in federal money-laundering cases

• Challenge the “knowing” or “intent” element. §1956 requires proof that the defendant knew funds were criminal proceeds (or intended to promote concealment). Demonstrating lack of knowledge or a legitimate source for funds is central to many defenses. Legal Information Institute
• Dispute whether the property was “criminally derived.” If funds are shown to have a lawful origin, §§1956/1957 cannot apply. Forensic accounting and careful documentation can be decisive.
• Attack the government’s forensic accounting or chain of custody. Errors or gaps in the government’s tracing of funds can undercut forfeiture and criminal allegations.
• Suppress unlawfully obtained evidence. Suppression motions (Fourth Amendment searches, improper warrants, illegal interception) can exclude key evidence.

Practical next steps if you or someone you know is under investigation or charged

1. Contact experienced federal defense counsel immediately. Early representation helps preserve legal arguments, protect rights during interviews, and shape the government’s investigatory path.
2. Do not speak to federal agents without counsel. Anything you say can be used in a prosecution; experienced counsel can accompany you to interviews or advise you to assert your rights.
3. Gather financial records and correspondence. Copies of bank statements, contracts, invoices, and communications are essential for building a defense and rebutting tracing claims.
4. Consider expert assistance early. Forensic accountants and investigators can begin reconstructing records and identifying lawful sources of funds.

Final note

Federal money-laundering and related forfeiture laws are complex and carry heavy consequences. The statutes most commonly charged are 18 U.S.C. §1956 (money laundering) and 18 U.S.C. §1957 (large monetary transactions), with forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. §§981 and 982. Convictions can mean years in federal prison, substantial fines, and the permanent loss of assets — so early, experienced federal defense matters.

Matthew Galluzzo is an experienced federal criminal defense attorney in New York and Connecticut. He lives in Connecticut and is a former Manhattan prosecutor. He has represented many people accused of money laundering offenses and earned excellent results. His undergraduate background in finance and his experience as a prosecutor make him especially qualified for these sorts of matters. Taken together, those attributes are exactly what defendants need when confronting money-laundering allegations under 18 U.S.C. §§1956 and 1957 and forfeiture claims under §§981/982. If you’re facing an investigation or indictment in the District of Connecticut, you should strongly consider contacting Matthew Galluzzo to discuss his engagement. After all, having a lawyer who (1) understands the federal statutes and DOJ practice, (2) can marshal forensic accounting and evidentiary challenges, and (3) knows how to negotiate with local prosecutors can make a decisive difference.