Listen To This Page:
Quick Navigation:
- Arizona Money Laundering Laws Under A.R.S. § 13-2317
- The Three Degrees of Money Laundering in Arizona
- Penalties for Money Laundering Charges in Arizona
- How Prosecutors Build a Money Laundering Case
- Defense Strategies for Arizona Money Laundering Charges
- State and Federal Money Laundering Charges
- Examples of Money Laundering Cases in Arizona
- Frequently Asked Questions About Arizona Money Laundering
- Important Things to Remember About Money Laundering Charges
- Contact an Attorney From CHM Law
Money laundering charges often begin with financial activity that may look ordinary on its own. A bank transfer, cash deposit, business payment, purchase, wire transfer, or exchange of property can become part of a criminal case when prosecutors claim the transaction involved proceeds from unlawful activity or was intended to conceal the source of the money. Arizona addresses these offenses primarily through A.R.S. § 13-2317. The statute creates three degrees of money laundering, and every degree is classified as a felony.
A money laundering investigation may also extend well beyond moving cash. Arizona law defines a transaction broadly enough to include purchases, sales, loans, gifts, deposits, withdrawals, transfers between accounts, currency exchanges, investments, and many other forms of moving or disposing of property. A.R.S. § 13-2317 can also apply to certain conduct involving false information, financial reporting requirements, money transmitters, forged documents, and transactions connected with racketeering.
Anyone facing money laundering charges in Arizona should pay close attention to the exact subsection prosecutors allege. The state may need to prove knowledge, intent, a connection to criminal proceeds, or other facts that depend on the particular charge, especially in cases of first-degree money laundering. The difference between third-degree, second-degree, and first-degree money laundering can also mean a major difference in potential prison exposure. This article explains Arizona money laundering laws, possible penalties, common defense strategies, state and federal charges, and how a criminal defense attorney from CHM Law can help.
Facing Money Laundering Charges?
Speak with our Criminal Defense Attorneys at CHM Law today.
Or, Continue Reading Below About:
Money Laundering Charges in Arizona: What ARS 13-2317 Means for Defendants
Arizona Money Laundering Laws Under A.R.S. § 13-2317
Arizona law governs money laundering under A.R.S. § 13-2317. The law does not create one single money laundering offense. Instead, it separates conduct into three degrees based on the alleged activity and the person’s role. Money laundering in the first degree is a class 2 felony, money laundering in the second degree is a class 3 felony, and money laundering in the third degree is a class 6 felony.
One common form of second degree money laundering involves acquiring, maintaining an interest in, transferring, transporting, receiving, transacting with, or concealing racketeering proceeds while knowing or having reason to know that the property represents proceeds of an offense. Another part of the statute applies when someone makes property available to another person while knowing that the property is intended to be used to facilitate racketeering. A separate provision addresses a transaction involving proceeds of an offense when there is an intent to conceal the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of the property, or an intent to facilitate racketeering. A.R.S. § 13-2317(B).
The term racketeering is important because Arizona gives it a broad statutory definition. A.R.S. § 13-2301 includes numerous offenses committed for financial gain, including theft, forgery, bribery, prohibited drug activity, trafficking in stolen property, schemes to defraud, money laundering itself, and several other crimes. This means a money laundering charge can arise from allegations involving drug trafficking, fraud, theft, financial crimes, or another alleged source of unlawful proceeds, leading to potential second-degree money laundering charges.
The law also reaches conduct involving regulated money transmitting activity. A.R.S. § 13-2317(B) addresses intentionally or knowingly making false entries, evading certain financial reporting requirements, providing false information that causes a required report to be inaccurate or omitted, misrepresenting a person’s identity in a transaction with a financial institution or money transmitter, and operating certain unlicensed money transmitting businesses. These provisions are one reason a money laundering investigation may involve business records and compliance documents even when prosecutors do not allege someone physically handled large amounts of cash.
The Three Degrees of Money Laundering in Arizona
Money Laundering in the Third Degree
Money laundering in the third degree is the lowest felony classification under A.R.S. § 13-2317, but it remains a criminal charge with potentially serious consequences. The statute applies to certain transactions involving money transmission in which a person intentionally or knowingly gives or agrees to give something of value to a money transmitter or an employee of a money transmitter to influence or reward that person for failing to comply with requirements imposed under Arizona’s money transmitter laws.
The statute also applies when a person who receives or transmits money, as an employee or otherwise, accepts something of value based on an agreement intended to influence or benefit the person for failing to comply with those legal requirements. Money laundering in the third degree is classified as a class 6 felony under A.R.S. § 13-2317(E).
Although a class 6 felony carries less prison exposure than a class 2 or class 3 felony, defendants should not treat the accusation as minor. A felony conviction may affect employment, professional licensing, financial opportunities, immigration matters, firearm rights, and future sentencing if another criminal case occurs.
Arizona law does permit certain nondangerous class 6 felony convictions to receive misdemeanor treatment or remain undesignated while a defendant completes probation when the statutory conditions are met. Eligibility depends on the person’s criminal history and the facts of the case, so this result should never be assumed merely because the money laundering charge is classified as a class 6 felony. A.R.S. § 13-604 sets out the rules governing this process.
Money Laundering in the Second Degree
Money laundering in the second degree covers much of the conduct people commonly associate with a money laundering charge. Under A.R.S. § 13-2317(B)(1), a person may be charged for acquiring, maintaining, transacting, transferring, transporting, receiving, or concealing racketeering proceeds while knowing or having reason to know the property represents proceeds of an offense.
Another part of the law applies when a transaction involves proceeds of an offense, and the person acts with an intent to conceal or disguise the property’s nature, location, source, ownership, or control. It may also apply when the transaction is intended to facilitate racketeering, which could lead to charges of third-degree money laundering. Prosecutors may therefore focus heavily on communications, account activity, transaction patterns, business records, or statements they believe show an intent to conceal.
Second-degree money laundering also includes several reporting- and identity-related offenses involving financial institutions, money transmitters, trades, and businesses. For example, a person may face a money laundering charge for intentionally or knowingly attempting to evade certain reporting requirements, providing false information that causes a required report to contain a material misstatement, or misrepresenting someone’s identity during a qualifying transaction.
Money laundering in the second degree is a class 3 felony. A conviction may carry substantial prison exposure, particularly when the defendant has historical prior felony convictions. It may also be charged alongside offenses such as fraud, theft, drug offenses, racketeering, or illegally conducting an enterprise, depending on the allegations.
Money Laundering in the First Degree
Money laundering in the first degree focuses on more serious alleged conduct. Under A.R.S. § 13-2317(A)(1), a person may be guilty when the person knowingly initiates, organizes, plans, finances, directs, manages, supervises, or is in the business of money laundering in violation of subsection B. This part of the law can be especially important in cases where investigators claim a defendant directed or managed a larger money laundering operation rather than participating in a single transaction.
A.R.S. § 13-2317(A)(2) also treats a violation of subsection B as money laundering in the first degree when the activity takes place in the course of, or for the purpose of facilitating, terrorism or murder. The connection to terrorism or murder raises the classification to the most serious degree under the Arizona money laundering statute.
Money laundering in the first degree is a class 2 felony. For someone with no prior felony conviction who is sentenced under the standard nondangerous sentencing provisions, A.R.S. § 13-702 provides a presumptive prison term of five years, with a range that may extend from three years as a mitigated term to 12.5 years as an aggravated term when the legal requirements for those sentences are satisfied.
Because the prosecution must establish the elements of the particular subsection charged, a defense lawyer should closely examine whether the evidence actually supports the claimed leadership, management, knowledge, criminal purpose, or other required connection. Simply participating in a financial transaction does not by itself establish every element of money laundering in the first degree.
Penalties for Money Laundering Charges in Arizona
The penalty for an Arizona money laundering conviction depends primarily on the degree of the charge, criminal history, applicable aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and whether another sentencing law applies. A.R.S. § 13-2317(E) makes third-degree money laundering a class 6 felony, second-degree money laundering a class 3 felony, and first-degree money laundering a class 2 felony.
For a person with no prior felony conviction sentenced under A.R.S. § 13-702, the standard nondangerous prison ranges are three to 12.5 years for a class 2 felony, two to 8.75 years for a class 3 felony, and approximately four months to two years for a class 6 felony when the entire mitigated-through-aggravated range is considered. The presumptive terms are five years, 3.5 years, and one year, respectively, for first-degree, second-degree, and third-degree money laundering.
Prior felony convictions can increase the exposure considerably. Under A.R.S. § 13-703, a category two repetitive offender convicted of a class 2 felony may face a range extending as high as 23 years, while a category three repetitive offender may face up to 35 years. A category three repetitive offender convicted of a class 3 felony may face as much as 25 years, while the aggravated term for a class 6 felony can reach 5.75 years. Whether a conviction qualifies as a historical prior felony and which repeat offender category applies requires a case-specific review.
Financial consequences may also be severe. Arizona generally permits a felony fine of up to $150,000 for an individual under A.R.S. § 13-801. A.R.S. § 13-2317(D) adds another major consequence when a person violates subsection A or B as part of a pattern involving at least $100,000 during a twelve-month period. In that situation, the person may be subject to forfeiture of substitute assets equal to three times the amount involved in the pattern.
These numbers should not be read as a prediction of a particular sentence. Probation may be legally available in some nondangerous cases, and A.R.S. § 13-902 provides maximum standard probation periods of seven years for a class 2 felony, five years for a class 3 felony, and three years for a class 6 felony when probation is available. Other statutes or facts can change the sentencing rules.
The legal team at CHM Law can review the alleged degree of money laundering, the amount of money involved, prior convictions, possible forfeiture exposure, and related criminal charges before advising a client about potential outcomes. This is especially important when prosecutors allege a continuing business of money laundering, multiple transactions, or a connection to racketeering activities.
How Prosecutors Build a Money Laundering Case
Money laundering cases are often document-heavy and require the expertise of a money laundering lawyer to navigate. Investigators may review bank statements, wire transfers, financial institution records, business ledgers, customer information, corporate records, text messages, emails, purchase records, property transfers, cryptocurrency records, tax documents, and communications between people accused of participating in the alleged criminal activities.
The Arizona statute gives prosecutors room to examine many forms of property movement because A.R.S. § 13-2317 defines transaction broadly. A transaction may include a purchase, sale, trade, loan, pledge, investment, gift, transfer, transmission, deposit, withdrawal, payment, transfer between accounts, currency exchange, extension of credit, or another acquisition or disposition of property. The statute also defines transmitting money to include electronic transfers, wire transmissions, internet transfers, couriers, and other methods.
Still, moving money is not automatically money laundering. The state must prove the elements of the charged offense. For example, certain portions of A.R.S. address the penalties for money laundering, including first-degree and second-degree money laundering. § 13-2317(B) requires proof that the defendant knew or had reason to know the property represented proceeds of an offense. Other provisions require intentional or knowing conduct, and subsection B(3) specifically addresses an intent to conceal or disguise the property or an intent to facilitate racketeering.
Arizona defendants are presumed innocent. A.R.S. § 13-115 provides that a criminal defendant is presumed innocent until guilt is proven and is entitled to acquittal when reasonable doubt remains. A defense attorney can therefore focus on gaps between suspicious-looking financial activity and the evidence required to prove each statutory element beyond a reasonable doubt.
A money laundering investigation may also begin before an arrest occurs. Investigators might seek records, interview witnesses, execute search warrants, or examine financial accounts while deciding whether to file criminal charges. Anyone who learns that law enforcement is asking questions about financial transactions should consider speaking with a criminal defense attorney before giving statements or turning over information beyond what is required by a valid legal process.
Defense Strategies for Arizona Money Laundering Charges
The best money laundering defense depends on the subsection charged and the evidence collected. No single defense applies to every case. Because A.R.S. § 13-2317 contains several different forms of prohibited conduct, a lawyer should compare the indictment or complaint against the precise statutory elements rather than treating every money laundering case the same way.
The criminal defense attorneys at CHM Law can examine financial records, search warrants, electronic communications, witness statements, business practices, and the alleged source of funds. Where financial transactions have legitimate explanations, those explanations may become central to challenging the prosecution’s theory.
Lack of Knowledge
Knowledge is a major issue in many money laundering cases. A person may receive money, process a payment, transfer property, or conduct business with someone involved in criminal activities without knowing the property is connected to an offense.
A defense lawyer may challenge whether the evidence proves the mental state required under the subsection charged. For example, A.R.S. § 13-2317(B)(1) applies when a person handles racketeering proceeds while knowing or having reason to know they are proceeds of an offense. Other provisions require intentional or knowing conduct. The exact language matters.
No Intent to Conceal or Facilitate Racketeering
A large transaction is not automatically evidence of an intent to conceal. A business owner may transfer money among accounts for payroll, taxes, inventory, operating expenses, debt payments, or investment reasons. Family members may transfer property for personal reasons unrelated to criminal activity.
When prosecutors rely on A.R.S. § 13-2317(B)(3), the defense can examine whether the state actually has evidence of an intent to conceal the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of property or an intent to facilitate racketeering. An unusual transaction may raise questions, but suspicion alone does not replace proof of the required elements in a first-degree money laundering case.
The Property Was Not Proceeds of an Offense
Another defense may attack the prosecution’s claim about where the money came from. If the state alleges that funds are proceeds of criminal activities, financial records may show legitimate income, loans, investments, asset sales, gifts, inheritance, business revenue, or another lawful source.
This issue can become especially important when lawful and allegedly unlawful funds have been deposited into the same account. A forensic review of the account history may help determine whether prosecutors can reliably connect a particular transaction to proceeds of an offense.
No Racketeering Connection
Some portions of Arizona’s money laundering law depend directly on racketeering proceeds or an alleged intent to facilitate racketeering. A.R.S. § 13-2301 defines racketeering through a long list of qualifying activities and requirements. If the alleged underlying criminal activity does not satisfy that statutory definition, the defense may challenge an element of the money laundering theory.
This defense may require careful review of both the money laundering charge and the alleged predicate crime. Prosecutors sometimes bring several criminal charges together, so weakening the alleged underlying offense may also affect the money laundering case.
Challenging Searches and Seizures
Money laundering investigations may involve searches of homes, offices, phones, computers, financial records, or other property. A defense lawyer can review how investigators obtained the evidence and whether constitutional or statutory requirements were followed.
If evidence was obtained through an unlawful search or seizure, counsel may seek to prevent the prosecution from using evidence when suppression is legally available. Search warrant affidavits, the scope of a warrant, execution of the search, and any claimed exceptions to the warrant requirement may all require review.
Statements and Miranda Issues
Investigators may rely heavily on statements when trying to show that a person knew the source of money or intended to conceal it, particularly in Phoenix criminal cases. A casual explanation made during an interview can later become part of the state’s theory about intent.
A failure to read Miranda rights does not automatically cause an entire criminal case to be dismissed. The issue generally concerns statements made during custodial interrogation and whether those statements can be admitted. Arizona also requires confessions used in state criminal prosecutions to be voluntary. A.R.S. § 13-3988 addresses the admissibility and voluntariness of confessions and self-incriminating statements.
False Information or Reporting Allegations Can Be Contested
Several portions of A.R.S. § 13-2317(B) deal with false information, omitted information, false personal identifying information, reports, and efforts to evade reporting obligations. These cases may turn on exactly what the defendant submitted, what the defendant knew, and whether an omission was intentional.
Mistakes in paperwork, clerical errors, inaccurate information supplied by another person, or misunderstandings about a reporting requirement are not necessarily the same as intentionally or knowingly violating the statute. The defense should examine who prepared each document, who supplied the information, and whether the evidence supports the required mental state.
State and Federal Money Laundering Charges
Money laundering activity can lead to Arizona state charges, federal money laundering charges, or both depending on the facts and jurisdiction. Arizona prosecutions commonly rely on A.R.S. § 13-2317, while federal prosecutors may use statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 1956 and 18 U.S.C. § 1957.
Federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 1956 covers several forms of laundering involving proceeds from specified unlawful activity. Depending on the provision, federal prosecutors may allege that a financial transaction was conducted with intent to promote unlawful activity, conceal or disguise criminal proceeds, or avoid reporting requirements. A conviction under major provisions of § 1956 can carry up to 20 years in federal prison and significant fines.
Another federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1957, generally addresses knowingly engaging or attempting to engage in certain monetary transactions involving more than $10,000 in criminally derived property from specified unlawful activity. The statute provides for imprisonment of up to ten years, along with fines.
State and federal money laundering laws are not identical. A transaction that becomes relevant under federal law may be analyzed differently under Arizona law. Federal investigations may also involve agencies and prosecutors with extensive financial investigative resources. When both state and federal authorities appear to be involved, a defense lawyer should evaluate exposure under each system rather than assuming that defending the Arizona charge alone resolves the issue.
A money laundering defense lawyer can also look for signs that an investigation could expand, particularly in the context of Phoenix money laundering cases. Allegations involving interstate wire transfers, international transactions, drug trafficking, organized fraud, unlicensed money-transmitting businesses, or large financial networks may draw federal attention, depending on the circumstances.
Examples of Money Laundering Cases in Arizona
Consider a Phoenix business owner who receives $80,000 from an acquaintance and deposits the money into the business account. The acquaintance later turns out to be under investigation for drug trafficking. The business owner then uses part of the money to pay vendors and operating expenses.
Those facts alone do not answer whether the business owner is guilty of money laundering. Prosecutors would need evidence that meets the requirements of the subsection they charge, especially in cases involving experienced criminal defense attorneys. If they claim second-degree money laundering based on racketeering proceeds, questions may include whether the money was actually proceeds of an offense and whether the business owner knew or had reason to know its source. If the owner believed the payment represented a legitimate loan or investment and documents support that explanation, the defense may have a meaningful basis to contest the charge.
In another example, suppose investigators claim that several people in Scottsdale operate businesses that accept money from an alleged fraud scheme. Prosecutors allege that one person coordinates transfers among several accounts, directs others to purchase assets, and manages efforts to make the funds appear to be ordinary business income.
If prosecutors can prove the person knowingly organized, directed, managed, or supervised money laundering activity that violates subsection B, they may pursue money laundering in the first degree, a class 2 felony. If the evidence shows only a more limited transaction and does not establish the alleged management role, the defense may challenge whether the higher degree is supported.
A third example could involve an employee of a Mesa money transmitting business who accepts something of value in exchange for ignoring a compliance requirement. Depending on the exact conduct, prosecutors could examine the third degree provisions of A.R.S. § 13-2317(C). The employee’s intent, communications, payment records, and knowledge of the agreement could become major issues in the case.
These examples show why the amount of money involved is only one part of the analysis. A large amount does not automatically establish money laundering, and some forms of prohibited conduct may result in charges even when the case centers on compliance activity rather than an elaborate effort to conceal cash.
Frequently Asked Questions About Arizona Money Laundering
Is money laundering always a felony in Arizona?
Yes. A.R.S. § 13-2317 classifies all three degrees as felonies. Money laundering in the third degree is a class 6 felony, money laundering in the second degree is a class 3 felony, and money laundering in the first degree is a class 2 felony.
A nondangerous class 6 felony may sometimes qualify for misdemeanor designation or an undesignated status under A.R.S. § 13-604, but eligibility depends on the defendant’s history and other circumstances.
Can I be charged with money laundering if I did not commit the crime that generated the money?
Potentially. The person accused of money laundering does not necessarily have to be the same person who committed the alleged underlying offense.
The major question may be whether prosecutors can prove the accused person’s required knowledge, reason to know, intent, or other elements under the particular portion of A.R.S.§ 13-2317 related to second-degree money laundering. Someone who innocently receives money connected to another person’s illegal conduct is in a very different position from someone who knowingly agrees to conceal criminal proceeds.
Does Arizona have to prove I intended to conceal the money?
It depends on the subsection charged. A.R.S. § 13-2317(B)(3) specifically requires an intent to conceal or disguise certain characteristics of the property or an intent to facilitate racketeering.
Other money laundering provisions use different mental state requirements. For example, subsection B(1) refers to knowing or having reason to know that property represents proceeds of an offense. A defense attorney should therefore identify the precise statutory theory being used rather than assuming intent to conceal is required in every money laundering case.
How many years in prison can I face for money laundering in Arizona?
For a person without a prior felony conviction sentenced under the standard nondangerous ranges in A.R.S. § 13-702, a class 2 felony can carry a mitigated-to-aggravated range of three to 12.5 years. A class 3 felony ranges from two to 8.75 years. A class 6 felony ranges from approximately four months to two years, which can be the penalty for third-degree money laundering.
Historical prior felony convictions may substantially increase those ranges under A.R.S. § 13-703. Other sentencing statutes can also apply depending on the circumstances.
Can the government seize property in a money laundering case?
Yes, forfeiture can become a major issue. A.R.S. § 13-2317(D) specifically provides that when certain subsection A or B violations form part of a pattern involving at least $100,000 within a twelve-month period, substitute asset forfeiture may equal three times the amount involved in the pattern.
Arizona’s racketeering laws also contain separate civil remedies and forfeiture provisions that may apply to proceeds or property associated with qualifying racketeering activity.
Can money laundering charges be filed along with other criminal charges?
Yes. A money laundering charge may appear alongside allegations involving fraud, theft, drug trafficking, forgery, racketeering, or illegally conducting an enterprise. Arizona’s racketeering definition includes many financially motivated criminal offenses.
The defense should evaluate each charge separately while also considering how prosecutors are attempting to connect the charges into a larger theory.
Should I speak with investigators if I believe I did nothing wrong?
Speaking voluntarily without legal advice can create risks. Financial investigations often involve detailed transactions that occurred months or years earlier, and even an innocent person may misremember dates, amounts, communications, or the purpose of a transaction.
A criminal defense attorney can communicate with investigators when appropriate, determine what information is being requested, and help protect against statements being taken out of context. If you learn that you are the subject of a money laundering investigation, obtaining legal advice before an interview can be especially important.
Important Things to Remember
Arizona money laundering law covers far more than physically hiding cash. A.R.S. § 13-2317 reaches transactions involving criminal proceeds, efforts to facilitate racketeering, certain financial reporting violations, false information, identity misrepresentations, money transmitting activity, and other conduct.
The exact degree matters. Money laundering in the first degree is a class 2 felony, second degree is a class 3 felony, and third degree is a class 6 felony. The defendant’s criminal history can also increase possible prison exposure far beyond the sentencing range for someone without a prior felony conviction.
A strong money laundering defense often begins by separating suspicious financial circumstances from the specific elements prosecutors must prove. Knowledge, intent, the source of the property, the existence of racketeering proceeds, financial records, and the way investigators obtained evidence may all affect the defense.
Contact an Attorney From CHM Law
Being accused of money laundering does not mean the prosecution has proven that you knowingly handled criminal proceeds or intended to conceal unlawful activities. Financial cases can involve thousands of transactions, business records, account statements, electronic communications, and assumptions about why money moved from one person or account to another. A criminal defense attorney can help identify the difference between financial activity that appears suspicious and evidence that actually satisfies A.R.S. § 13-2317.
The criminal defense attorneys at Colburn Hintze Maletta can review the money laundering charge, the alleged proceeds of an offense, the government’s evidence, possible racketeering allegations, search warrants, financial records, and statements made during the investigation. The goal is to identify weaknesses in the prosecution’s case and determine whether charges can be dismissed, reduced, resolved through negotiation, or contested at trial.
CHM Law’s attorneys bring trial experience and plea negotiation skills to serious felony cases. The firm’s established professional relationships with Arizona prosecutors and law enforcement can also help facilitate direct communication when a case is under investigation or already pending. When necessary, the defense team can prepare to challenge the government’s financial evidence and its interpretation of the defendant’s conduct in court.
CHM Law offers free one-on-one lawyer consultations for people facing criminal allegations in Arizona. Call 602-962-8339 to discuss a money laundering investigation or criminal charge with the firm’s defense team.
Always Available 24/7 for Legal Help
Schedule an Appointment Today!
Call Us Now to Speak with an Attorney (602) 825-2500
Real Client Reviews
Below are just a few of what our clients have to say!
“The outcome was what I was hoping for!”
Darin Colburn was wonderful, professional and a wealth of information. He was so helpful along with Whitney his paralegal.. the outcome was what I was hoping for !! Thank you all for everything !! His entire office staff was great!! I am so thankful for all of you!!
Vicki Poutre - Google Review
“Very professional, and efficient and they are always here for you.”
Hands down the absolute best team you will ever work with. Throughout the entire process never had to worry about anything at all. Very professional, and efficient and they are always here for you.
Amina Riley - Google Review
“They provide outstanding legal services”
Colburn Hintze Maletta PLLC provided outstanding legal services. Their expertise and dedication were evident from our first consultation through to the successful resolution of my case. They were attentive to my needs, responsive to inquiries, and navigated complex legal issues with confidence. I highly recommend them for anyone seeking reliable and knowledgeable legal representation.
Izac - Google Review
“AMAZING communication!”
AMAZING communication!! I was impressed by their commitment to going the extra mile for me. Highly recommend!
Sandi Jarquin - Google Review
“She is very knowledgeable and is there with you through the whole process”
It was a pleasure working with Juanita Peña, she is very knowledgeable and is there with you through the whole process. Excellent customer service. I will be referring my family and friends.
Veronica Navarro - Google Review
“He is bright, articulate, thorough and always on top of things”
Darin pulled off an amazing series of complicated negotiations for me, with my ex-wife, over a two-year period, with a final very favorable outcome. He is bright, articulate, thorough, and always on top of things. He was an excellent straight-up communicator. I feel very fortunate that he represented me.
John Beck- Google Review
“Thank you Tim for showing empathy for my situation!”
I had a free consultation with Timothy Hintze, he’s super compassionate and takes the time to hear you out and answer questions. He’s very honest and based on that consultation I can tell her is quick to think on his feet. Unfortunately right now I can’t change my order or modify but definitely considering him once it’s time to modify my order in the future! Thank you Tim for showing empathy for my situation! I don’t get that a lot from lawyers.
Natalie Nat - Google Review
“Let me just say she was an amazing attorney”
I had gone in to see a lawyer for my DUI. My attorney was Jessica. Let me just say she was an amazing attorney I could’ve asked for, I really thought I was going to do 3 years in prison & thanks to her I only did 1 day in jail. That’s just wow a big WOW !! I truly can’t thank her enough for what she did. She’s amazing if you ever get a DUI ask for Jessica. Can’t go wrong with her, she is outstanding! One more thing, Kiara is an amazing helper. She and Jessica are both great. Kiara answered all the questions I had. You can just say I’m so thankful I had them helping me out with my case.
Luz Jimenez - Google Review
“He exceeded all of my expectations”
I cannot recommend Mr.Castillo enough. As a survivor of domestic violence, I needed an attorney who was not only knowledgeable and experienced but also compassionate and understanding. Mr. Castillo exceeded all of my expectations. He listened to my story with empathy and kindness and guided me through the legal process with clarity and expertise. He was always available to answer my questions, address my concerns, and offer support when I needed it most.Thanks to Mr.Castillo, I received the justice and protection I deserved. If you’re going through a similar situation, please don’t hesitate to reach out to them.
Danna Mendoza - Google Review
“Not all heroes wear capes!”
Going through a divorce was one of the most stressful times in my life. I was scared, feeling cornered, and in a financial pickle. Darin and his team made everything super easy and manageable. He listened, validated, and gave valuable feedback on each line item. I was very thorough in my search for an attorney since my case involved some complications. My divorce ended up being contested and then appealed. We went to court several times and Darin shined every time! For the amount of work he put in he was very reasonably priced! I spoke to many attorneys, have friends who are attorneys, and even worked with one prior to finding him, that’s how I know Darin is a gem! Hire him! Not all heroes wear capes!
Karen - Avvo Review
“So knowledgeable and professional”
Mr. Dave Maletta Is so knowledgeable, professional, and all-around the person you want to go to. I left the office feeling secured and more enlightened on what was going on. They handled my case with such delicacy and I would recommend this office If you want people who will take on your case with a strategic and professional approach.
Miranda Flores- Google Review
“She exhibited remarkable attention to detail”
I recently engaged the legal services of Attorney Lauren Bostick to finalize my divorce, and I am compelled to share my experience as it was truly exceptional. Going through a divorce is undoubtedly a challenging and emotionally taxing process, but Lauren navigated me through it with professionalism, compassion, and unwavering dedication. From our initial consultation, it was evident that Lauren possessed a deep understanding of family law and a genuine commitment to helping clients through difficult transitions. Lauren exhibited remarkable attention to detail, ensuring that every aspect of my case was thoroughly examined and addressed. She took the time to listen attentively to my concerns, patiently answering my questions and providing clear explanations of the legal processes involved. Lauren has the ability to balance assertiveness in negotiations with a sincere desire to achieve a fair and amicable resolution. Furthermore, Lauren demonstrated exceptional professionalism and reliability throughout the entire duration of my case. She was consistently responsive to emails and calls, promptly addressing any new developments or inquiries that arose. This level of accessibility and responsiveness greatly alleviated much of the stress associated with a divorce. In conclusion, I wholeheartedly recommend Lauren Bostick to anyone in need of legal representation for divorce proceedings. Her combination of legal expertise, compassion, and dedication truly sets her apart as an outstanding advocate for her clients.
Cathy Miller - Google Review
“She’s provided me with the best experience”
Juanita was outstanding throughout my whole process. She’s provided me with the best experience I could possibly have through the toughest times of my life. Her team is exceptional as well as very knowledgeable and caring firm!
Danelly Aleman- Google Review
“He treated us as individuals with unique circumstances and emotions”
I had an incredibly positive experience with Colburn Hintze Maletta’s firm, especially thanks to attorney Henry Álzate. He played a crucial role in guiding my mother’s case, especially regarding financial support after her unexpected divorce. Henry demonstrated a profound commitment, ensuring to pursue of the best possible outcome with dedication and empathy. One of Henry’s standout qualities is his genuine care for individuals. Despite my mother’s language barrier, Henry facilitated communication, ensuring she comprehended every step of the legal process. This made a significant difference in our comfort and understanding throughout the case. His ability to convey complex legal matters in a clear and compassionate manner is truly admirable. Throughout our interactions, Henry’s charisma and warmth made us feel valued beyond just being clients; he treated us as individuals with unique circumstances and emotions. His support and determination to achieve favorable results for my mother were evident from start to finish. I highly recommend Henry Álzate and the Colburn Hintze Maletta firm for anyone seeking legal assistance, especially in family law matters. Henry’s professionalism, empathy, and dedication are exemplary, ensuring that clients receive not only exceptional legal representation but also genuine support during challenging times.
Yajaira Magana - Google Review
“They had very clear understanding with great patience”
I love the customer service. They really take their time to provide knowledge and a very clear understanding with great patience.
Monica Scott - Google Review
“She is a fantastic attorney”
Lauren, is a fantastic attorney and understands the judges quirks and perspectives very well. She is great at communicating with you the expectations and ground work that you will need prior to going to court in order to assist in helping you win your case. The tips and advice she gave me proved to be paramount in setting up my custody battle case to show trends and disprove the oppositions arguments prior to going in front of a judge. Lauren has an excellent team of paralegal that understand her expectations for preparing for court and they work around the clock to ensure that you feel comfortable with the materials and game plan strategy. During some financial hardships that I experienced last year due to a layoff, not only did Lauren and CHM allow me to go on a payment plan but Lauren personally reached out to her personal network to help me find employment. That was a WOW factor, because it showed me that I am valued as a client but more importantly she believed in my cause and valued me as a person. I have kept Lauren services since 2022 following her as she switched law firms and will continue to use her and her team as needed for any other family law issues. She is deeply valued and appreciated in my family making the family Christmas card mailing list.
Anthony Gregory- Google Review
“She was knowledgeable and patient but educated as well”
Juanita was absolutely wonderful and a pleasure to meet. She was knowledgeable and patient but educated as well to be more involved and aware of our case. Thank you, Juanita, for being a blessing to us! May God continue to bless you tenfold!
Cassandra Hemphill- Google Review
“Got the most for the injury.”
Got the most for the injury, plus great customer service.
Mayra Alvarado - Google Review
“I was impressed with his knowledge and quick response to my needs”
David Maletta is very detailed in his explanation of legal procedures. I was impressed with his knowledge and quick response to my needs. He instantly made me feel at ease. He is very professional, caring, and trustworthy. I highly recommend his services.
Diane Matelich - Google Review
“He has been extremely professional compassionate and knowledgeable”
I’m at the beginning of my case but so far I am very impressed. Everybody says this but I am innocent and I need a lawyer who believes in me. David has been extremely professional compassionate and knowledgeable. I am praying all will go well so far I’d recommend these people highly to you.