Blog

30+ Years of Experience


Proven Results

115+ Jury Trials

9x Super Lawyers Honoree

The Legal Myth Series, Part Six: “That’s Just Hearsay!”
James Spies James Spies

The Legal Myth Series, Part Six: “That’s Just Hearsay!”

Clients often say, “That’s just hearsay!” when they hear the prosecutor plans to use the alleged victim’s statements or the testimony of a witness. But not every statement is hearsay. In fact, the accuser’s direct testimony in court is considered direct evidence, not hearsay.

Read More
The Legal Myth Series, Part Five: “I Can’t Be Charged for Drugs They Didn’t Find on Me”
James Spies James Spies

The Legal Myth Series, Part Five: “I Can’t Be Charged for Drugs They Didn’t Find on Me”

A common belief among clients is that you can only be held responsible for drugs actually found in your pocket, your car, or your house. In reality, federal law looks far beyond what is physically seized. Through witness testimony, cooperating defendants, and investigative evidence, prosecutors can attribute large quantities of drugs to a person even when those drugs were never found in their possession.

Read More
The Legal Myth Series, Part Four: I Can’t Be Convicted Without Physical Evidence
James Spies James Spies

The Legal Myth Series, Part Four: I Can’t Be Convicted Without Physical Evidence

Many people believe that the only way a prosecutor can win a conviction is by presenting physical evidence. They picture DNA, fingerprints, or surveillance video as the centerpiece of every case. This belief comes from television shows and movies that glorify forensic science. In reality, Kansas law does not require physical evidence for a conviction. A jury can return a guilty verdict based on testimony alone if they find that testimony credible.

Read More
The Legal Myth Series, Part Three: If I Don’t Talk to the Police, I’ll Look Guilty
James Spies James Spies

The Legal Myth Series, Part Three: If I Don’t Talk to the Police, I’ll Look Guilty

Many people believe that staying silent when questioned by police will make them look guilty. This myth has been spread for years and often leads people to give statements that later hurt their case. The truth is that silence is not a sign of guilt. It is a legal right, and it may be the most important protection you have when facing criminal charges in Kansas.

Read More
What the Kansas City Chiefs Can Teach You About Building a Winning Defense
James Spies James Spies

What the Kansas City Chiefs Can Teach You About Building a Winning Defense

When you think of the Kansas City Chiefs, you probably picture Patrick Mahomes slinging impossible passes, Travis Kelce finding space where none exists, and Arrowhead Stadium roaring with the loudest fans in football. Behind all of that is something that connects championship football to criminal defense. A winning strategy in court, like a winning game on the field, does not happen by accident.

Read More
How Criminal History Points Impact Your Federal Sentence
James Spies James Spies

How Criminal History Points Impact Your Federal Sentence

When people face sentencing in federal court, they are often shocked at how much their past comes back to haunt them. Even old misdemeanors or minor convictions can add criminal history points under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Those points can push your recommended sentence years higher, which is why understanding them—and fighting them when possible—is so important.

Read More
What Is a Proffer Session in Federal Court, and Should You Do It?
James Spies James Spies

What Is a Proffer Session in Federal Court, and Should You Do It?

If you are under federal investigation, you may hear prosecutors or agents talk about doing a proffer session. To many people, it sounds simple: just go in, tell your side of the story, and maybe they will go easy on you. The truth is more complicated. A proffer session can help you, but it can also hurt you if you do not understand the risks.

Read More
What Is a Sentencing Variance in Federal Court and Why a Great Sentencing Memorandum Matters
James Spies James Spies

What Is a Sentencing Variance in Federal Court and Why a Great Sentencing Memorandum Matters

When most people hear they are going to be sentenced in federal court, they assume the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are set in stone. The truth is very different. The Guidelines are only advisory, not mandatory, and judges have the power to go above or below the recommended range. That is called a variance, and it can make all the difference in how much time a person actually serves.

Read More
Understanding the Federal Safety Valve: A Way Around Mandatory Minimums
James Spies James Spies

Understanding the Federal Safety Valve: A Way Around Mandatory Minimums

In federal court, mandatory minimum sentences can feel like a trap. Many drug offenses carry minimum terms of five or ten years, no matter what the individual circumstances are. The good news is that Congress created something called the safety valve, which allows certain defendants to be sentenced below the mandatory minimum.

Read More
Why the Sentencing Guidelines Are Not the End of the Story in Federal Court
James Spies James Spies

Why the Sentencing Guidelines Are Not the End of the Story in Federal Court

If you are facing sentencing in federal court, you may feel like the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines decide everything. The Guidelines are important, but they do not tell the whole story. Judges are required to consider them, but they also have the power to go above or below the range when justice calls for it.

Read More

How can James help you?

Red Bar Smaller.png

Learn about how I specialize my criminal defense practice to help protect the rights of my clients.