No matter the time, we're here for you. Reach out 24/7!2900 Woodridge Drive, Suite 210, Houston, TX 77087
Home/Practice Areas/Criminal Defense/Environmental crimes
Most of these cases start as a regulatory inspection. Whether they end there depends largely on how the first weeks are handled.
Criminal Defense
Environmental enforcement in Texas runs on a ladder: an inspection produces findings, findings produce a notice of violation, and most matters resolve administratively with corrective action and a penalty. Matters escalate to criminal exposure where an agency believes conduct was knowing or intentional, where records were falsified, or where an incident caused real harm. Statements made to inspectors, and documents produced without review, are what usually turn the first kind of case into the second.
Not only companies. Owners, plant managers, environmental coordinators and site supervisors are charged personally where an agency concludes they knew. Contractors are frequently caught by the conduct of a subcontractor or a hauler they hired and did not verify. Because a company and its people can have divergent interests once an investigation opens, they often need separate counsel — and recognising that early avoids a great deal of damage.
Be courteous and be careful. Establish the scope of the inspection and whether it is consensual or under warrant. Take your own photographs and samples in parallel. Designate one person to communicate with the agency. Do not speculate about causes, do not offer explanations that will be quoted back, and preserve every record immediately — because deleting anything after an inspection is a far worse problem than the original violation.
Criminal matters are quoted as a flat fee for a defined stage of the case, so you know what representation costs before you commit to it. Payment plans are available. What the fee buys is a lawyer who appears at your settings, reads the file rather than skimming it, and tells you honestly which parts of the State's case are weak and which are not.
No. Most matters resolve administratively with corrective action and a penalty. They escalate where an agency believes conduct was knowing or records were falsified.
Be courteous and careful. Establish the scope of the inspection, take your own photographs and samples, and designate one person to communicate with the agency.
Yes. Owners, plant managers and site supervisors are charged personally where an agency concludes they knew about the conduct.
That is a real defence and it depends on your contracts, what you verified and what you knew. Documentation of your oversight matters.
Often, and that is the normal outcome. Just make sure what you sign does not admit facts a prosecutor could later use.
Usually, and it should be done through counsel so the work is privileged. An unprivileged internal report is a gift to the government.
Falsifying monitoring data, manifests or reports, and failing to report a release — often more seriously than the underlying violation itself.
Frequently. Their interests can diverge once an investigation opens, and recognising that early avoids a great deal of damage.
They must be preserved. Deleting or altering anything afterwards is a far worse problem than the original violation.
Either, and sometimes both. State and federal agencies can pursue the same conduct, which is a reason to coordinate the response from the beginning.
Free Consultation
Available 24/7 · Office hours Monday to Friday, 9:00 AM – 5:00 PM
