State charges are prosecuted by the Bexar County District Attorney under Texas law in state court. Federal charges are brought by U.S. Attorneys under federal statutes in federal court. Federal cases generally carry harsher mandatory sentences, are harder to resolve favorably, and move through a different court system entirely. Some situations result in both state and federal charges simultaneously.

Under Texas law, a felon may possess a firearm at their own home more than five years after release from confinement, parole, or probation — whichever is later. However, federal law still prohibits felons from possessing firearms in virtually all circumstances. This gap creates serious legal risk for those who rely on the Texas exception without understanding federal law.

A straw purchase occurs when a person who can legally buy a gun does so on behalf of someone who cannot — such as a felon or someone prohibited by law. It is a federal felony regardless of intent. Even if the buyer didn’t know the purpose of the purchase, the government may still pursue charges. These cases are aggressively prosecuted in South Texas.

18 U.S.C. § 924(c) requires mandatory minimum prison sentences when a firearm is used or carried during a drug trafficking crime or crime of violence. These sentences run consecutively — on top of, not instead of, whatever sentence you receive for the underlying crime. They cannot be suspended or run concurrently. This makes fighting the underlying charge critically important.

Potentially yes. The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. If law enforcement found the weapon during an illegal traffic stop, without a valid warrant, or without proper consent, we can file a motion to suppress the evidence. If the gun is suppressed, the government may not be able to proceed with the charge at all.

The ACCA enhances the penalty for federal felon-in-possession charges when the defendant has three or more prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses. Instead of up to 10 years, an ACCA enhancement triggers a mandatory minimum of 15 years in federal prison. Challenging whether prior convictions qualify as ACCA predicates is a critical part of federal firearms defense.

Yes — firearms offenses can have severe immigration consequences including deportation, inadmissibility, and permanent bars to legal status. Non-citizens facing firearms charges must have an attorney who understands both criminal and immigration law. Attorney Cortez takes immigration consequences seriously in every case involving non-citizen clients.

Immediately. Federal investigators may already be building a larger case before charges are even filed. Statements you make in custody can be used against you. Evidence can disappear. The sooner an attorney is involved, the more options are available — including potentially preventing charges from being filed at all in some situations.

Yes. Under 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government only needs to prove that a criminal agreement existed and that you knowingly joined it. Unlike general conspiracy law, federal drug conspiracy does not require an “overt act” — meaning you can be convicted even if no drugs were ever found on you or seized by police. This is what makes conspiracy charges particularly dangerous and why challenging knowledge and intent is so critical.

The safety valve under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) allows a judge to sentence below the mandatory minimum for first-time, non-violent drug offenders who meet specific criteria — including having minimal criminal history, not using violence, not being a leader, and fully debriefing the government. Qualifying for safety valve can be the difference between a mandatory 10 years and a sentence of 4-5 years. Attorney Cortez evaluates safety valve eligibility in every case from the start.

A 5K1.1 motion is filed by the government when a defendant provides substantial assistance in the prosecution of others. If granted, it allows the judge to sentence below the mandatory minimum — sometimes dramatically so. Cooperation is a complex strategic decision that must be carefully evaluated with experienced counsel. Providing assistance that is later deemed insufficient, or that creates new legal exposure, can make your situation worse rather than better.

Drug quantity is the single most important factor driving federal drug sentences. It determines whether mandatory minimums apply, and at what level. In a conspiracy case, you can be held responsible for all drugs handled by every co-conspirator — even drugs you never touched. Challenging the quantity attributed to you at sentencing is one of the most impactful things your attorney can do to reduce your actual sentence.

No — under Riley v. California, police must obtain a warrant to search your cell phone incident to arrest. However, if you consent to the search, that consent waives your Fourth Amendment protection. Never consent to a phone search. Cell phone data — texts, GPS pin drops, WhatsApp messages — is often the most damaging evidence in federal drug cases and is used to prove knowledge, intent, and participation in a conspiracy.

Federal sentencing distinguishes between “meth-actual” (the pure drug itself) and “meth-mixture” (the total weight including cutting agents). The penalties for meth-actual are triggered at lower weights — 5 grams of pure meth triggers the same 5-year minimum as 50 grams of mixture. Lab analysis of purity is therefore critically important and can be challenged if the government’s testing methodology was flawed.

Yes, but it is not automatic. In federal court there is no bail bondsman — you must convince a judge at a detention hearing that you are not a flight risk and not a danger to the community. Drug trafficking charges create a presumption in favor of detention that your attorney must overcome. Having experienced counsel at your detention hearing — ideally your first appearance — significantly improves your chances of pretrial release.

This is one of the most common situations in San Antonio drug cases involving I-35, I-10, and Hwy 90 traffic stops. The government must prove you had both knowledge of the drugs and control over them. When drugs are hidden in secret compartments — false fuel tanks, hidden panels, spare tires — the Fifth Circuit requires additional evidence beyond your mere presence in the vehicle to establish knowing possession. We fight hard for drivers who genuinely did not know about concealed drugs.