Barry Wm. Levine focuses his practice on white collar defense & investigations, and has represented dozens of defendants in major white collar crime cases. His criminal practice spans from pre-indictment counseling and grand jury practice to full-fledged jury trials of lengthy and complex criminal cases.
Barry has represented numerous high-ranking elected and appointed public officials, lawyers, scientists, bankers, and businesspeople. He also has represented clients in congressional investigations. Additionally, he has a substantial and wide-ranging complex civil litigation practice. He has defended class action lawsuits on behalf of corporate defendants, and has litigated as both plaintiff’s and defendant’s counsel regarding antitrust, healthcare, insurance, law firm partnership disputes, energy, securities, and insider trading.
Barry is a veteran of the Independent Counsel wars, and has represented numerous other criminal cases in diverse areas, including election laws, money-laundering, public corruption, government contract fraud, Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), environmental crimes, immigration fraud, and securities fraud. He has represented members of Congress in both Congressional hearings and federal court litigation.
Many of Barry’s complex civil litigation cases frequently involve allegations of financial fraud and defamation claims. He routinely appears in the federal trial and appellate courts throughout the nation and in various legal forums in other parts of the world.
From 1969 to 1975, Barry was an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, principally assigned to the Fraud Section. In that capacity, he was involved in hundreds of major criminal fraud investigations and prosecutions, and was lead counsel in scores of jury trials.
Chambers USA states that sources say that Barry “is smart, defense-minded and has a lot of trial experience” and is “terrific in the courtroom as he is so charismatic.” Chambers continues, “[h]is clients further attest: ‘He stands out because of his responsiveness, technical abilities and his courtroom success.’”