Identity Theft Criminal Defense:§ 1028, Aggravated Identity Theft, and State ID Theft Charges

Name: Vikk Ai
Telephone: +1
Price range: $$

Vikk AI provides instant federal and state-specific identity theft criminal defense guidance. It explains 18 U.S.C. § 1028 (identity theft), 18 U.S.C. § 1028A (aggravated identity theft with 2-year mandatory consecutive sentence), state ID theft charges, common defenses, and prepares you for an attorney consultation. Free to start. No credit card required.

Identity theft criminal defense is a specialized area driven by two federal statutes that are among the most consequential in federal criminal law. 18 U.S.C. § 1028 covers identification document fraud and identity theft generally. 18 U.S.C. § 1028A covers 'aggravated identity theft' and adds a mandatory 2-year consecutive sentence on top of any underlying fraud or other offense if the defendant 'knowingly transferred, possessed, or used' another person's identification 'during and in relation to' a felony enumerated in the statute. The 2-year mandatory consecutive is one of the few mandatory minimums that judges cannot reduce except through specific narrow circumstances. State identity theft charges parallel the federal structure with their own elements and penalties. Whether you are facing federal § 1028 charges, federal § 1028A aggravated identity theft, state identity theft charges, or related charges (credit card fraud, access device fraud, computer fraud), Vikk AI is your always-available legal research, rights education, and defense preparation partner. Vikk AI does not replace an identity theft defense attorney. The federal mandatory minimum, the procedural complexity, and the long-term consequences make attorney representation essential. What Vikk AI does is dramatically reduce what your attorney bills by handling the research, the document organization, and the consultation preparation. Ask any question about your specific charge, the federal § 1028 and § 1028A statutes, state identity theft law, common defenses, sentencing exposure including the 2-year mandatory consecutive, and the long-term consequences. Upload indictments, discovery materials, financial records, communications, and any other case documents and Vikk AI analyzes everything in plain English. Draft motion outlines, plea negotiation memoranda focused on charge reduction to avoid § 1028A, sentencing mitigation packages, and consultation preparation packages in minutes. When the case requires courtroom representation, Vikk AI suggests verified federal and state criminal defense attorneys in your area or you can browse the directory yourself.

What is criminal identity theft?

Criminal identity theft is the unlawful use of another person's identifying information to commit fraud or other crimes. The criminal charges are distinct from civil identity theft (which is the victim's experience and remediation, covered separately in the Consumer Protection section). Criminal identity theft is the prosecution of those who steal and use others' identities. Federal and state statutes define identity theft to include both the theft of identifying information and the misuse of that information to commit additional crimes.

What is 18 U.S.C. § 1028?

18 U.S.C. § 1028 is the federal identity theft and identification fraud statute. It criminalizes a wide range of conduct involving identification documents and identification information.

Production of false identification documents: Producing false identification documents knowing they are stolen, false, or unlawfully made. Up to 15 years imprisonment, depending on circumstances.
Transfer of false identification: Transferring false identification with intent to commit unlawful activity. Similar penalties to production.
Possession of false identification: Possessing five or more false identification documents with intent to use unlawfully. Up to 15 years.
Possession of authentication features: Possessing tools, materials, or devices for producing false identification. Up to 15 years.
Possession of authentication features stolen from another: Possessing identification authentication features stolen from another person. Up to 15 years.
Trafficking in identification: Knowingly transferring or possessing identification of another person to commit, aid, or abet a federal crime, or to engage in unlawful activity. Up to 15 years (typical, with various enhancements).
Use of authentication features in connection with crime: Using another's identification in connection with commission of any unlawful activity that constitutes a felony under any federal or state law.

What is 18 U.S.C. § 1028A (aggravated identity theft)?

18 U.S.C. § 1028A (aggravated identity theft) adds a mandatory consecutive 2-year sentence to any qualifying underlying federal felony when the defendant 'knowingly transferred, possessed, or used' another person's identification 'during and in relation to' the underlying felony. The 2-year sentence is mandatory and consecutive, meaning it must be served on top of (not concurrent with) the sentence on the underlying felony.

Mandatory consecutive 2-year sentence. If § 1028A applies, the court must impose 2 years on top of the underlying felony sentence. The sentence cannot run concurrent with the underlying. The court has no discretion to reduce or avoid the 2-year sentence except through specific narrow exceptions.
Qualifying predicate offenses. The underlying felony must be one enumerated in § 1028A, including: many fraud offenses (mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, identification document fraud, fraud against federal benefit programs), drug trafficking, immigration offenses, and various others.
'During and in relation to' requirement. The Supreme Court in Dubin v. United States (2023) narrowed the 'during and in relation to' requirement, holding that the use of identification must be 'at the crux' of what makes the conduct criminal, not just incidental. The Dubin decision created important defense opportunities for cases where identification use was peripheral rather than central.
'Knowingly' requirement. Defendant must have known the identification belonged to a real person. The Supreme Court in Flores-Figueroa v. United States (2009) held the knowledge requirement extends to whether the identification belongs to a real person.
Stacking multiple counts. Multiple § 1028A counts can be stacked, with each adding 2 years (with the second and subsequent counts running concurrent under § 1028A(b)(4) if specifically identified by the court).
Why § 1028A drives plea negotiation. The mandatory 2-year consecutive sentence is one of the most consequential penalties in federal criminal law. Plea negotiation in identity theft cases often focuses on avoiding § 1028A entirely (negotiating to charges that do not carry the enhancement) or limiting it to a single count. The 2-year mandatory consecutive is far more consequential than 2 years of guideline sentence on the underlying offense.

The Dubin v. United States narrowing

In Dubin v. United States (2023), the Supreme Court substantially narrowed § 1028A. The Court held that the use of identification must be 'at the crux' of the underlying criminality, not just connected to it. Healthcare fraud cases involving billing for services provided to real patients (where the patient identification was used in submitting the false claim but was not the basis of the fraud) are no longer covered. Defense opportunities under Dubin are an active area in federal practice and Vikk AI helps you assess Dubin applicability.

What does the prosecution have to prove for identity theft?

The elements of federal § 1028 vary by subsection. The general elements for the most common charge (use of another's identification for an unlawful purpose) are below.

Knowingly transferred, possessed, or used: The defendant knew their conduct involved another's identification. Knowledge is the central mental element.
Means of identification of another person: Identifying information of another real person. The Supreme Court in Flores-Figueroa held the defendant must know the identification belongs to a real person, not be a synthetic or fabricated identity.
Without lawful authority: The defendant did not have authorization to use the identification.
In connection with unlawful activity: The use was in connection with a federal or state felony or other unlawful conduct specified by the statute.
For § 1028A specifically: Plus the additional 'during and in relation to' the qualifying underlying felony, with the post-Dubin requirement that the identification use be 'at the crux' of the underlying criminality.

What about state identity theft charges?

Every state has its own identity theft statutes that parallel the federal structure with state-specific elements and penalties. State identity theft is often charged when the conduct does not have a federal nexus or when state authorities prefer to prosecute.

State statutes generally

Most states criminalize the unauthorized use of another's identifying information for unlawful purposes. The structure varies but generally parallels the federal approach.

California Penal Code § 530

5. California identity theft statute. Felony with up to 3 years state prison. Multiple subsections cover different conduct (using another's identity, possessing identifying information, fraudulent applications).

Texas Penal Code § 32

51. Texas identity theft statute. State jail felony to first-degree felony depending on the number of victims and circumstances.

Florida Statutes § 817

568. Florida identity theft statute. Felony with significant prison exposure. Specific subsections for harvesting personal identification, fraudulent transactions, and various other conduct.

New York Penal Law § 190

78 et seq. New York identity theft statutes (multiple degrees). Class A misdemeanor through Class D felony depending on the dollar amount and circumstances.

Federal vs state choice

When the conduct could be charged in either jurisdiction, federal authorities tend to charge larger schemes, multi-state conduct, and cases involving sophisticated technology. State prosecutors handle smaller, single-state cases. Federal sentences are typically longer and have the § 1028A mandatory consecutive available.

What are common identity theft defenses?

Identity theft cases have specific defenses tailored to the elements.

Lack of knowledge that identification was real: Under Flores-Figueroa, the prosecution must prove the defendant knew the identification belonged to a real person. In some cases, defendants believed identification was fabricated, synthetic, or otherwise not a real person's. The knowledge requirement can support successful defenses, particularly in synthetic identity cases.
Lack of unlawful purpose or authorization: The use was for a lawful purpose (use of legitimately shared identification for legitimate business purposes), or with authorization from the identified person. Common in family business contexts where one family member uses another's identification with consent for legitimate purposes.
Dubin defense (for § 1028A specifically): Under Dubin v. United States, the use of identification must be 'at the crux' of the underlying criminality. Cases where identification use was peripheral, incidental, or not central to the fraud may not support § 1028A. The defense can challenge the § 1028A enhancement even when the underlying fraud is conceded.
Mistaken identity: The defendant was not the person who used the identification. Common in cases involving multiple people with access to the same systems or accounts.
Insufficient evidence of identification ownership: The prosecution must prove the identification belonged to the alleged victim. Defenses can include challenges to the alleged victim's ownership, evidence that identification was actually shared or assigned to multiple people, and similar issues.
Constitutional defenses: Suppression of statements obtained in violation of Miranda, Fourth Amendment challenges to digital searches, attorney-client privilege issues, and procedural defenses.
Statute of limitations: Federal § 1028 has a 5-year statute of limitations. § 1028A's statute of limitations follows the underlying offense's. Careful timing analysis can support statute-of-limitations defenses.

How does federal sentencing work for identity theft cases?

Federal identity theft sentencing combines the federal sentencing guidelines for the underlying offense with the § 1028A mandatory consecutive when applicable.

Underlying fraud sentencing

The underlying fraud is sentenced under the applicable guideline (typically § 2B1.1 for most fraud) with loss-amount enhancements. See the Fraud page for detailed sentencing guidelines analysis.

§ 1028 (without § 1028A) sentencing

Identity theft under § 1028 alone is sentenced under § 2B1.1 with applicable enhancements for the loss amount, sophistication, and number of victims. Up to 15 years statutory maximum for many subsections.

§ 1028A mandatory consecutive

When § 1028A applies, the 2-year mandatory consecutive sentence is added to whatever sentence is imposed for the underlying. The 2-year cannot be reduced below 2 years and cannot run concurrent with the underlying. Multiple § 1028A counts can be stacked, though courts have discretion under § 1028A(b)(4) to run multiple § 1028A counts concurrent.

Practical impact

A 24-month underlying fraud sentence becomes 48 months total when § 1028A applies. A 60-month underlying fraud sentence becomes 84 months with § 1028A. The 2-year add-on doubles the practical impact of small fraud cases and is the leading driver of plea negotiation in federal identity theft cases.

Plea negotiation strategy

Federal identity theft plea negotiation typically focuses on: avoiding § 1028A entirely (negotiating to charges without the enhancement), limiting § 1028A to a single count, ensuring multiple § 1028A counts run concurrent, or reducing the underlying offense level.

What about the long-term consequences of identity theft convictions?

Identity theft convictions have severe collateral consequences beyond the criminal sentence.

Federal felony record: Federal identity theft is a felony with significant collateral consequences for employment, housing, professional licensing, and civil rights.
Restitution: Identity theft cases routinely involve substantial restitution obligations, both to direct victims and to financial institutions that absorbed losses. Federal restitution is mandatory and not dischargeable in bankruptcy.
Civil suits: Identity theft victims can pursue civil suits for damages. Civil judgments are in addition to any criminal restitution.
Immigration consequences: Identity theft is a 'crime of moral turpitude' for immigration purposes, triggering deportation. Most identity theft convictions are 'aggravated felonies' under immigration law if the loss exceeds $10,000, with mandatory deportation and no relief available.
Employment: Identity theft convictions are particularly damaging for employment in financial services, healthcare, government, and any position involving handling of personal data. Many employers have automatic exclusions.
Professional licensing: Most professional licensing boards consider identity theft convictions, often resulting in denial or revocation due to the dishonesty implication.
Public benefits: Some federal benefits (federal employment, federal contracting) have specific exclusions for identity theft convictions.

How Vikk AI Helps With Your Identity Theft Charge

Ask: Get state-specific answers, 24/7, in plain English

Ask any question about your identity theft case. Examples: "How does Dubin v. United States narrow § 1028A?" "Can my § 1028A counts be challenged under the Flores-Figueroa knowledge requirement?" "What is the difference between § 1028 and § 1028A?" "Will my California § 530.5 conviction be deportable?" "Can multiple § 1028A counts be stacked or do they run concurrent?"

Upload: Have any document analyzed clause by clause

Upload indictments, discovery materials, communications, financial records, and any other case documents. Vikk AI evaluates Dubin applicability, knowledge-requirement defenses, and § 1028A-avoidance plea strategies.

Draft: Generate every document your case needs

Vikk AI drafts Dubin-based motion outlines challenging § 1028A applicability; plea negotiation memoranda focused on § 1028A avoidance; loss calculation analyses for the underlying fraud; sentencing mitigation packages; cooperation analysis memoranda; and consultation preparation packages.

Ready to start? Begin a free identity theft criminal defense conversation in 60 seconds, no credit card required.

Real Walkthrough:How a Defendant Avoided § 1028A Aggravated Identity Theft and Reduced Federal Exposure From 36 Months to 14 Months

A defendant was charged in federal court with three counts of wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343) and three counts of aggravated identity theft (18 U.S.C. § 1028A) related to a scheme involving fraudulent online purchases using stolen credit card information. The aggravated identity theft counts each carried mandatory 2-year consecutive sentences, theoretically adding 6 years on top of any wire fraud sentence (though under § 1028A(b)(4) multiple counts can run concurrent at the court's discretion). The total exposure with all enhancements approached 6 to 9 years. He retained a federal criminal defense specialist for $40,000 and used Vikk AI for preparation work alongside.

Step 1: Vikk AI explained the federal framework and § 1028A leverage

Vikk AI walked him through 18 U.S.C. § 1343 (wire fraud), § 1028 (identity theft), and § 1028A (aggravated identity theft, mandatory 2-year consecutive). Vikk AI also explained the Dubin v. United States narrowing of § 1028A: the use of identification must be 'at the crux' of the underlying criminality, not merely incidental to it. This created an opportunity to challenge the § 1028A counts.

Try It For Free

Step 2: Vikk AI helped him identify the Dubin defense applicability

Vikk AI helped analyze the case under Dubin: the wire fraud was the unauthorized purchases using credit card information; the identity theft enhancement was based on use of cardholder names and addresses in the transactions. The defense argument under Dubin: while identification was used in the transactions, the criminality was centered on the unauthorized purchases (the fraud), not the identification. The cardholder names were incidental to billing addresses, not at the crux of the criminality. This created a basis for challenging the § 1028A counts.

Try It For Free

Step 3: Vikk AI built the loss-amount and mitigation case

Vikk AI helped him work on the underlying wire fraud as well: the actual loss to the cardholders was approximately $48,000 (since the credit card companies and banks reimbursed cardholders for the fraudulent charges), with the actual financial victims being the credit card companies. Total adjusted loss: approximately $115,000. He had also paid $35,000 in pre-sentence restitution, had a clean prior record, and had a strong family situation (sole financial support for two children).

Try It For Free

Step 4: Negotiated plea dropping § 1028A counts

The federal defense specialist used Vikk AI's analysis to negotiate. The defense argument: the Dubin analysis weakened the § 1028A counts, the financial victims were primarily credit card companies (not the cardholders whose identifications were used), and the underlying conduct was best addressed through wire fraud sentencing. The prosecution agreed to dismiss the three § 1028A counts in exchange for a plea to a single count of wire fraud.

Try It For Free

Step 5: Sentencing and final outcome

At sentencing, the federal sentencing guidelines computation: base 7 + loss enhancement +8 (for $115,000 range loss) + sophistication +2 - acceptance -3 = level 14, corresponding to 15 to 21 months. The court accepted the loss calculation and the mitigation package, varied 1 month below the guidelines, and imposed 14 months federal prison plus 3 years supervised release plus restitution of $115,000.

Total cost: $40,000 attorney retainer plus $35,000 pre-sentence restitution plus $300 in court costs = $75,300 in pre-conviction costs. Compared to the 36-month sentence the prosecution initially sought (which assumed both wire fraud guidelines and the § 1028A mandatory consecutive), savings approximately 22 months of prison. The most valuable result was the dropping of the § 1028A counts, which alone would have added 2 years mandatory consecutive (potentially 6 years if the multiple counts had been stacked).

Try It For Free

When should you use Vikk AI vs. when should you hire an attorney?

Vikk AI is your always-available legal research, education, planning, and drafting partner. For matters that need a courtroom advocate, Vikk AI tells you so honestly and connects you to a verified attorney in your state. Even then, Vikk AI keeps working alongside the attorney: analyzing documents, translating legalese, drafting your responses, and helping you be a better-informed, lower-cost client.

Use Vikk AI For	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)
Understanding your specific identity theft charge and its elements	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Every identity theft case (especially federal § 1028 and § 1028A cases)
Distinguishing between § 1028 (general) and § 1028A (aggravated, mandatory consecutive) charges	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)All cases with § 1028A aggravated identity theft charges
Analyzing § 1028A applicability under the Dubin v. United States narrowing	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)All federal cases (sentencing guidelines complexity)
Computing federal sentencing guidelines exposure including the § 1028A consecutive	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)All cases with loss amounts over $50,000
Evaluating defenses including lack of knowledge, lack of unlawful purpose, and Dubin defense	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Cases involving non-citizens (immigration consequences)
Modeling plea options focused on dropping or limiting § 1028A counts	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Cases involving cooperation or substantial assistance decisions
Drafting motion outlines for suppression, statute of limitations, and Dubin-based challenges	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Cases with parallel civil suits or financial institution claims
Drafting plea negotiation memoranda emphasizing § 1028A avoidance	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Cases involving licensed professionals
Drafting comprehensive sentencing mitigation packages	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Trial-level defense (always)
Drafting cooperation analysis memoranda evaluating substantial assistance opportunities	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)Appeals from identity theft convictions
Coordinating identity theft criminal defense with civil ID theft restoration if applicable	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)
Coordinating identity theft defense with immigration counsel for non-citizens	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)
Translating attorney letters, plea offers, and court documents into plain English	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)
Suggesting verified federal and state criminal defense attorneys in your area	Hire a Verified Attorney to Lead (Vikk AI Still Supports You)

Need an Attorney

If your case needs a courtroom advocate, Vikk AI can suggest verified attorneys in your area, or you can browse our directory listings and reach out to attorneys in your state on your own. Either way, your full Vikk AI conversation history and drafted documents are organized for the handoff, saving you billable hours of intake.

Why Vikk AI Is the Most Trusted AI Legal Assistant for This Topic

Built for U.S. criminal law, not general chatbot answers

Vikk AI's training and prompting are tuned specifically for U.S. criminal law: federal and state criminal procedure, constitutional rights, plea bargaining, sentencing guidelines, and the practical realities of state and federal courts. It is not a general-purpose chatbot pretending to know law; it is a focused criminal-defense research and preparation partner that understands the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony, between state and federal jurisdiction, and between what you can DIY and what requires defense counsel.

Automatic state-specific localization

Criminal law varies dramatically by state. The same conduct can be a misdemeanor in one state and a felony in another. Sentencing ranges, fines, license consequences, and registration requirements differ significantly across the 50 states and federal courts. Vikk AI automatically tailors every answer to your specific state's statutes, sentencing ranges, and procedural rules. You never need to specify the state; Vikk AI determines it from your question and applies it everywhere relevant.

Privacy-aware and privilege-aware by default

Criminal cases involve highly sensitive information. Vikk AI handles your conversations with appropriate discretion. It also understands that conversations with Vikk AI do not have the same legal protections as attorney-client communications. When you raise topics that touch on case-sensitive information, Vikk AI reminds you to coordinate the most sensitive details with your attorney rather than sharing them in ways that could affect your case.

Honest about its limits, especially in criminal cases

Criminal defense requires courtroom representation that AI cannot provide. Vikk AI will tell you clearly when you need an attorney, when you should not speak to police without one, and when a step you are considering would be a serious mistake. It does not pretend to substitute for criminal defense counsel. It makes good representation more affordable by handling the research, document organization, and preparation work that traditionally drives most of the legal bill.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between § 1028 and § 1028A?

§ 1028 is the general identity theft and identification fraud statute, with up to 15 years imprisonment for various subsections. § 1028A is 'aggravated identity theft' that adds a mandatory 2-year consecutive sentence on top of an underlying federal felony when the defendant used another's identification 'during and in relation to' the underlying. The § 1028A 2-year is mandatory and consecutive, making it one of the most consequential federal criminal statutes.
What is Dubin v. United States and why does it matter?

Dubin v. United States (2023) is a Supreme Court decision that narrowed § 1028A. The Court held that the use of identification must be 'at the crux' of the underlying criminality, not merely connected to it. Cases where identification use is peripheral or incidental may no longer support § 1028A. Dubin created important defense opportunities, particularly in healthcare fraud and similar cases.
Is the § 1028A 2-year sentence really mandatory?

Yes. The 2-year sentence is mandatory and consecutive. The court has very limited discretion to reduce or avoid it. It must run consecutive to (not concurrent with) the sentence on the underlying. The mandatory nature is the central reason § 1028A drives plea negotiation in federal identity theft cases.
Can multiple § 1028A counts be stacked?

Multiple counts can be charged but courts have discretion under § 1028A(b)(4) to run multiple counts concurrent if specifically identified. In practice, courts often run multiple § 1028A counts concurrent, particularly when they arise from the same scheme. The structuring is part of plea negotiation.
What is Flores-Figueroa v. United States?

Flores-Figueroa v. United States (2009) is a Supreme Court decision establishing that § 1028A's 'knowingly' requirement extends to whether the identification belongs to a real person. The defendant must know the identification was real (not fabricated, synthetic, or otherwise not a real person's). The decision created defense opportunities for cases involving fabricated or synthetic identities.
What is the difference between criminal identity theft and civil identity theft?

Criminal identity theft is the prosecution of those who steal and use others' identities. Civil identity theft is the victim's experience and remediation: clearing their credit, dealing with fraudulent accounts, recovering financial losses. The two are connected (the criminal case involves victims), but the legal processes are entirely separate. See the Consumer Protection section for civil ID theft restoration.
Can § 1028A be charged for any underlying federal crime?

No. § 1028A applies only to enumerated predicate offenses listed in the statute. Common predicates include: many fraud offenses (mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud), identification document fraud, fraud against federal benefit programs, drug trafficking, immigration offenses, and others. The predicate must be one of those specifically listed.
Will an identity theft conviction affect my immigration status?

Severely. Identity theft is a 'crime of moral turpitude' triggering deportation. Many identity theft convictions over $10,000 in loss are 'aggravated felonies' for immigration purposes, with mandatory deportation and no relief available. Coordinate with an immigration attorney from the start of the case.
Can identity theft charges be reduced or dismissed?

Sometimes. Reductions and dismissals can come through: Dubin-based challenges to § 1028A applicability, lack-of-knowledge defenses (Flores-Figueroa), insufficient evidence of identification ownership, plea negotiation to drop § 1028A counts in exchange for plea to underlying fraud, and statute of limitations defenses.
What is access device fraud and how does it relate?

Access device fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1029) covers fraudulent use of credit cards, debit cards, and similar 'access devices.' Most identity theft cases involving credit card fraud are charged under both § 1028/§ 1028A and § 1029. § 1029 has its own sentencing structure and provides additional charging flexibility for prosecutors.
Can I use Vikk AI for the entire identity theft case?

No. Identity theft cases require attorney representation, especially federal cases involving § 1028A mandatory consecutive sentences. What Vikk AI does is dramatically reduce what your attorney bills by handling the research, document organization, Dubin analysis, and consultation preparation. Use Vikk AI alongside a retained federal defense attorney.