Challenging ATF Investigations in Weapons Trafficking Cases

Thanks for visiting Spodek Law Group, a second-generation criminal defense firm managed by Todd Spodek, with over 50 years of combined experience defending federal firearms cases throughout New York. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) investigates weapons trafficking using sophisticated techniques – undercover operations, controlled purchases, firearm tracing, wiretaps, and cooperation with state and local law enforcement. When ATF targets you for weapons trafficking, your facing federal charges carrying 10-20+ years. But ATF investigations have vulnerabilities. Agents make mistakes, evidence gets mishandled, constitutional rights get violated. Challenging these investigations aggressively can result in suppressed evidence, dismissed charges, or acquittals at trial.

How ATF Investigates Weapons Trafficking

ATF uses multiple investigative tools. Understanding their methods identifies defense opportunities.

Firearm Tracing

ATF’s National Tracing Center traces crime guns from manufacturer to first retail sale. Police recover a firearm, submit it to ATF. ATF contacts manufacturer, distributor, dealer, and identifies the purchaser. If your name appears repeatedly in traces – multiple firearms you purchased turned up in crimes – ATF opens trafficking investigations.

Here’s the problem: trace data doesnt prove trafficking. Maybe you sold guns lawfully to people with clean backgrounds who later sold illegally. Maybe guns were stolen. Maybe you sold them at a gun show five years ago to someone with proper ID. Trace data shows guns ended up in crimes – not that you trafficked them. There’s a gap between correlation and causation that prosecutors need to bridge, and theft reports, bills of sale, or significant time gaps between purchase and recovery all undermine their trafficking theory.

Controlled Purchases and Undercover Operations

ATF uses undercover agents and informants for controlled purchases. Agent approaches you, negotiates purchases, records conversations. These operations raise entrapment issues – if the agent induced you to traffic firearms you wouldnt have trafficked otherwise, that’s entrapment. The question becomes: were you predisposed, or did the agent create the crime?

I’ve defended cases where agents offered huge sums, persisted through refusals, eventually convinced clients to sell. That’s entrapment – government created the crime.

Surveillance and Wiretaps

ATF conducts surveillance – following you, photographing meetings, documenting transactions. They seek wiretap authorizations to intercept communications. Both have constitutional limitations. Surveillance cant enter your home without a warrant. Wiretaps require court authorization showing probable cause and necessity. The wiretap application is where things get interesting – did ATF show probable cause? Demonstrate necessity? If the application is deficient, wiretap evidence gets suppressed.

Constitutional Violations

Look, ATF agents are aggressive. They push constitutional boundaries. That creates defense opportunities.

Fourth Amendment – Search and Seizure

ATF needs warrants unless an exception applies: consent, exigent circumstances, search incident to arrest, automobile exception, plain view. The warrant affidavit is your first target. Did ATF have probable cause? Include false statements? Omit material facts? If based on false information, evidence gets suppressed under Franks v. Delaware. For warrantless searches, the question is whether exceptions actually applied – was it true consent or coerced? Real exigent circumstances or manufactured urgency?

Then there’s the pretextual stop problem. ATF works with local police for pretextual stops – broken taillight – then inventory searches finding firearms. Was there real probable cause for the stop or was it pretextual? Was the inventory search following standardized procedures or just a pretext to search your vehicle?

Fifth Amendment – Self-Incrimination

ATF interviews targets hoping for incriminating statements. They ask about purchases, sales, transfers. Anything you say can be used. Were you given Miranda if in custody? If ATF interrogated you in custody without Miranda, statements get suppressed. The custody determination becomes critical – were you actually free to leave or just told you were?

Sixth Amendment – Right to Counsel

Once charged, you have right to counsel. If ATF questions you after charges without your lawyer, statements get suppressed under Massiah v. United States. I’ve won suppression where ATF used informants to elicit statements after clients were charged and represented. The government cant circumvent Sixth Amendment using informants.

The Informant Problem

ATF relies on confidential informants (CIs) – people facing charges who cooperate to reduce sentences. CIs have incentives to lie and fabricate. What charges are they facing? What benefits were promised? Has the CI lied before? At trial, cross-examination focuses on criminal history, cooperation agreements, motivations. Juries understand criminals cooperating to avoid prison have reasons to lie.

Sometimes ATF’s CI use crosses into outrageous government conduct. If the CI created the crime through extreme methods, courts can dismiss. I defended a case where an informant pressured my client, offered huge payments, threatened harm to family. We moved to dismiss. The court agreed – tactics violated due process.

Challenging the Interstate Commerce Element

Federal prosecutions require proving interstate commerce. For commercial firearms, that’s automatic – trace data showing manufacture in one state, sale in another. For homemade firearms or ghost guns where trace data unavailable, proving interstate commerce is harder. Sometimes the government cant meet its burden.

Discovery Violations

Prosecutors must disclose exculpatory evidence under Brady v. Maryland. ATF generates massive evidence – surveillance logs, agent notes, informant debriefings, trace reports. Prosecutors must turn over anything helping your defense. Demanding complete discovery is non-negotiable. If prosecutors withhold Brady material, move for sanctions.

I’ve won cases where ATF withheld informant statements contradicting the government’s theory. Juries acquitted once we discovered withheld material.

Attacking the Trafficking Conspiracy

Most trafficking cases involve conspiracy charges. Prosecutors must prove agreement to traffic firearms and an overt act.

The agreement element is where conspiracy cases often fail. Maybe you sold firearms to people you thought had legal purposes. Maybe transactions were isolated, not ongoing conspiracy. Without proof of agreement, conspiracy fails. There’s also the withdrawal defense – if you withdrew before certain crimes, you’re not liable. Withdrawal requires affirmative acts like notifying co-conspirators or taking steps to prevent future crimes.

At Spodek Law Group, we’ve defended ATF trafficking cases from indictment through trial. We file discovery motions demanding all ATF materials – surveillance logs, trace reports, CI debriefings, wiretap applications, agent notes. We file suppression motions challenging searches, seizures, statements. If ATF violated Fourth or Fifth Amendment rights, evidence gets suppressed. Without evidence, cases collapse. We investigate CIs thoroughly – criminal histories, deals made, backgrounds that impeach credibility. We attack trace evidence by showing alternative explanations: guns were stolen, lawfully sold, or transferred years before crimes.

You can reach us 24/7 at our offices throughout NYC and Long Island. When ATF targets you for weapons trafficking, aggressive defense can mean the difference between decades in prison and walking free.