We are seeking an experienced legal researcher for an ongoing relationship supporting federal criminal defense work. The immediate matter involves sentencing research for an 18 U.S.C. § 1014 case in the Tenth Circuit involving PPP/EIDL loan issues.
This is a serious, time-sensitive matter. We need someone with:
- Active Westlaw or LexisNexis access
- PACER access
- Strong legal research judgment
- Ability to verify citations, find relevant precedent, provide pin cites, and organize research clearly
Federal criminal sentencing experience is strongly preferred, but not absolutely required if you are otherwise an excellent legal researcher with strong federal research skills.
This is not a Google-search assignment and not an AI-summary assignment. We need professional legal research using reliable legal databases. The goal is not to collect a large number of cases. The goal is to identify the cases that actually matter.
Nature of the Work
This is primarily a research-only engagement. You will locate, verify, brief, and organize case law and other legal authority. You will not be responsible for drafting court filings or developing litigation strategy.
However, the research must include more than a list of cases. Each important case should include:
- Key facts
- Legal issue
- Holding
- Reasoning
- Relevant pin cites
- KeyCite or Shepard’s status
- Whether the case is helpful, harmful, distinguishable, or worth further review
- A short explanation of how the case may apply to the matter
All work will be reviewed by counsel. We are requesting research support, not independent legal advice.
Immediate Research Areas
The immediate assignment may include some or all of the following areas, prioritized as needed:
- 18 U.S.C. § 1014 false statement research
- Mental state distinctions
- Materiality
- False statement cases involving loans, financial institutions, SBA programs, PPP, EIDL, or similar federal benefit or credit programs
- Cases distinguishing intentional false statements from mistake, misunderstanding, negligence, or regulatory confusion
- Tenth Circuit relevant conduct research
- U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3
- Jointly undertaken criminal activity
- Scope of agreement
- Foreseeability
- “Mere association” defenses
- Limits on attributing conduct, loss, or acts of others to a defendant
- Amendment 810, if applicable
- PPP/EIDL fraud sentencing survey
- Loss calculation
- Intended loss versus actual loss
- Cross-statute relevant conduct
- Repayment credits
- Eligible borrower arguments
- Multiple applications versus funded loans
- Non-custodial or below-guidelines sentencing outcomes
- Favorable or distinguishable fact patterns
- Sentencing Guidelines and mitigation research
- U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1, fraud loss calculation
- 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), variance factors
- Aberrant behavior under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.20
- Extraordinary family circumstances under U.S.S.G. § 5H1.6
- Comparable below-guidelines sentences
- Plea, stipulation, and PSR issues
- Interpretation of plea agreements, stipulations, admissions, and factual proffers
- Disputed PSR facts
- Rule 32 obligations
- Unsupported allegations in a PSR
- Probation officer neutrality and accuracy obligations
- Citation verification
- Approximately 25 citations need to be verified
- Some citations may require careful review because they may be inaccurate or generated from unreliable AI-assisted research
- Verification should include existence, correct citation, quotation accuracy, pin cite accuracy, current status, and usefulness
- Judicial sentencing profile
- Prior comparable sentencing decisions
- Sentencing tendencies where publicly available
- Relevant rulings
- Useful public information from reliable sources
Expected Deliverables
We need organized, usable legal research. Deliverables may include:
- Case chart
A table of relevant cases showing case name, citation, court, year, issue, key facts, holding, sentencing result if applicable, usefulness, pin cites, and KeyCite or Shepard’s status.
- Short case briefs
Concise summaries of the most important cases, including facts, issue, holding, reasoning, important pin cites, and how the case may apply.
- PDF copies of key cases
Copies of important cases, with relevant pages, quotations, or pin cites clearly identified.
- Citation verification table
A table confirming whether each provided citation exists, is correctly cited, accurately supports the proposition, has the correct pin cite, and remains good law.
- PPP/EIDL sentencing comparison chart
For PPP/EIDL or similar cases, a chart showing charge, loan amount, loss amount used at sentencing, guideline range if available, sentence imposed, custody or non-custody result, mitigation facts, and relevance.
- Short research memo, if needed
After the initial research, we may request a short memo on selected issues. The first priority is finding, verifying, organizing, and explaining the best authorities.
Required Qualifications
Please do not apply unless you have:
- Active Westlaw or LexisNexis access
- PACER access
- Strong legal research experience using professional legal databases
- Ability to provide accurate citations, pin cites, case summaries, and KeyCite or Shepard’s verification
- Ability to research federal criminal issues carefully and accurately
Federal criminal sentencing experience is strongly preferred, but not required if you have strong federal research ability.
Credentials such as a J.D. or paralegal certificate are helpful, but proven research skill matters more.
Strongly Preferred Experience
- Federal criminal sentencing research
- U.S. Sentencing Guidelines research
- Federal criminal defense research
- Fraud or false statement research
- SBA, PPP, EIDL, or CARES Act fraud research
- White-collar criminal research
- Tenth Circuit research
- PSR dispute research
- Citation verification and case-status review
Proposal Questions
Please answer these questions. Generic proposals will not be considered.
Q1 — Tools and Access
Do you have active access to Westlaw or LexisNexis? Do you have PACER access? Which platform do you use?
Q2 — Background and Experience
Briefly describe your legal research experience, including years of experience and the types of matters you have handled. Please specifically mention any experience with federal law, criminal law, federal sentencing, Sentencing Guidelines, fraud, false statement cases, PPP, EIDL, SBA, CARES Act issues, or Tenth Circuit research.
Federal criminal sentencing experience is strongly preferred, but if you do not have that exact experience, explain why your research background would still allow you to handle this assignment carefully and efficiently.
Q3 — Research Judgment
Assume a Westlaw or LexisNexis search returns 40 or more PPP fraud sentencing cases. How would you decide which 10 to 15 cases are the most useful? Please explain your actual process for evaluating relevance, factual similarity, jurisdiction, court level, sentencing outcome, and usefulness.
Q4 — Availability, Turnaround, and Rate
Please provide your hourly rate, weekly availability, how quickly you can start, and your expected turnaround time for an initial research assignment.
Q5 — Sample and References
Please provide a redacted sample of prior legal research work product showing case summaries, pin cites, and KeyCite or Shepard’s analysis.
If you cannot provide a sample due to confidentiality, please provide a short sample case brief using any public federal case of your choice.
Final Note
This matter is important and time-sensitive. We are looking for someone careful, experienced, and reliable who can put in the effort needed to find the cases that actually matter.
Please do not send a generic proposal. In your response, specifically address your database access, PACER access, legal research experience, availability, and rate.
— Michael
...
Show more