×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔
Michael James Stengel

Michael James Stengel

5.0
1 review

619 South Cooper Street, Memphis, TN 38104

Computer Crime, Fifth Amendment Law, Fourth Amendment Law and 90 more

About Michael James Stengel

Michael James Stengel is a lawyer practicing computer crime, fifth amendment law, fourth amendment law and 90 other areas of law. Michael received a B.A. degree from University of Rochester in 1983, and has been licensed for 40 years. Michael practices at Stengel Law Firm in Memphis, TN.

Michael James Stengel (Memphis, Tennessee)

Awards

Client Reviewed
This badge is granted to attorneys who have been reviewed by a past client.
Champion Badge Reviewed
AV Preeminent Peer Rated
This elite award is granted to attorneys who have been recognized by their peers for their very high ethical standards, with an average peer review score of 4.5 or higher.
Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV

Client Champion Awards

Client Champion awards recognize those attorneys who excel at service as affirmed by their clients. The awards, based on the quantity and quality of an attorney’s Martindale-Hubbell client reviews, demonstrate an ongoing commitment to delivering excellent client service. Award recipients stand out from their peers with a platinum, gold or silver icon.

Champion Badge Silver

At least three reviews and a score of 4.0 or higher.

Champion Badge Gold

At least six reviews and a score of 4.2 or higher.

Champion Badge Platinum

At least ten reviews and a score of 4.5 or higher.

Martindale Peer Awards

A lawyer who receives a minimum threshold of qualifying responses from fellow attorneys can qualify for one of three prestigious Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings:

Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV Preeminent Rating

AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

Michael James Stengel got this award in 2021

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Distinguished Rating

Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Notable Rating

Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Avvo Awards

Avvo Top Contributor

Avvo Top Contributor: The Avvo Top Contributor Award is granted to attorneys who have earned significant contribution points in a given year on our sister site, Avvo.com. Contribution points are earned by answering questions in Q&A, publishing Legal Guides, and other useful contributions to the Avvo community.

Avvo Client Choice

Avvo Client’s Choice: The Avvo Client's Choice Award Badge is granted to attorneys with a significant number of 4+ star reviews in a given year.

Reviews for Michael

Have you consulted or hired this lawyer?

Leave a review about your experience with this lawyer.

Write a Review

Overall Rating
5.0
See All Reviews
1
Showing 1-1 of 1 client reviews from Lawyers.com
Lawyers.com Rating Snapshot
5 stars
100%
4 stars
0%
3 stars
0%
2 stars
0%
1 star
0%
What do people say on Lawyers.com?
Communication
5.0
Quality of Service
5.0
Responsiveness
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
Criminal Law
Posted by anonymous
July 25, 2011
Hired Attorney

Mr. Stengel handled my appeal on a federal case. He won that appeal.

Services

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law 13
    • Death Penalty
    • DUI/DWI
    • Expungements
    • Federal Criminal Law
    • Felonies
    • Homicide
    • Misdemeanors
    • Parole and Probation
    • Sex Crimes
    • Theft
    • Traffic Violations
    • Weapons Charges
    • Drug Crimes

  • Drivers License Suspension
  • Malicious Prosecution
  • Consumer Law 1
    • Identity Theft
  • Securities 1
    • Securities Fraud
  • White Collar Crime
  • Other 74
    • Computer Crime
    • Fifth Amendment Law
    • Fourth Amendment Law
    • Contract Fraud
    • Corporate Criminal Law
    • Assault and Battery
    • Burglary
    • Capital Formation
    • Crime Victims Compensation
    • Criminal Antitrust
    • Criminal Appeals
    • Criminal Conspiracy
    • Criminal Defense
    • Criminal Forfeiture
    • Criminal Fraud
    • Criminal Investigation
    • Criminal Prosecution
    • Driving While Intoxicated
    • Electronic Surveillance
    • Extortion
    • Extradition
    • Forensic Accounting
    • Forensic DNA
    • Forensic Medicine
    • Forensic Science
    • Forgery
    • Grand Jury Practice
    • Habeas Corpus
    • Hit and Run
    • International Criminal Law
    • International Extradition
    • Mail Fraud
    • Manslaughter
    • Money Laundering
    • Murder
    • Post-Conviction Remedies
    • Search and Seizure
    • Sexual Assault
    • Shoplifting
    • Stalking
    • Vehicular Homicide
    • Victims Rights
    • Wire Fraud
    • Wiretapping
    • Drugs and Narcotics
    • Civil Drug Forfeiture
    • Controlled Substances Law
    • Drug Forfeiture
    • Drug Trafficking
    • Environmental Criminal Law
    • Fraud
    • Odometer Tampering
    • False Claims Act
    • Government Investigations
    • Government Contract Fraud
    • Health Care Fraud
    • Insurance Fraud
    • Arson and Insurance Fraud
    • Insurance Fraud Defense
    • Customs Seizures
    • Internet Crimes
    • Investment Fraud
    • Trial Practice
    • Military Criminal Law
    • Real Estate Fraud
    • Criminal Taxation
    • Criminal Tax Audits
    • Tax Appeals
    • Tax Controversies
    • Tax Evasion
    • Tax Fraud
    • Embezzlement
    • White Collar Criminal Defense
    • White Collar Fraud

Practice Details

  • Payment Information
    Payment & Cost Features
    Free initial consultation
    Fixed hourly rates
    Fixed fees available
  • Firm Information
    Position
    Member
    Firm Name
    Stengel Law Firm
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Parks v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. No. 38 (1990)
    Graphic Systems v. Taylor, 791 S.W.2d 27 (1990)
    United States v. John Berry, 807 F.Supp. 439 (W.D. Tenn. 1992)
    United States v. Karen Berry, 807 F. Supp. 442 (W.D. Tenn. 1992)
    Hannahs v. United States, 75 AFTR 2d 95-1150 (W.D. Tenn. 1995)
    United States v. Flowers, 55 F. 3d 218 (6th Cir. 1995)
    Walco Investments, Inc. v. Thenen, 168 F.R.D. 315 (S.D. Fla. 1996)
    Walco Investments, Inc. v. Thenen, 947 F. Supp. 491 (S.D. Fla. 1996)
    United States v. Fleming, 128 F. 3d 285 (6th Cir. 1997)
    United States v. Robinson, 152 F.3d 507 (6th Cir. 1998)
    United States v. Johnson, 152 F.3d 553 (6th 1998)
    United States v. Curly, 167 F.3d 316 (6th Cir. 1999)
    United States v. Elkins, 95 F. Supp. 2d 796 (W.D. Tenn. 2000)
    United States v. Mask, 101 F. Supp. 2d 673 (W.D., Tenn. 2000)
    United States v. Curtis, 237 F.3d 598 (6th Cir. 2001)
    United States v. Bush, 252 F.3d 959 (8th Cir. 2001)
    United States v. Mask, 154 F.Supp.2d 1344 (W.D. Tenn. 2001)
    United States v. Saari, 272 F.3d 804 (6th Cir. 2001)
    United States v. Elkins, 300 F.3d 638 (6th Cir. 2002)
    United States v. Faison, 339 F.3d 518 (6th Cir. 2003)
    Okerson v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. No. 14 (2004)
    United States v. Miller, 434 F.3d 820 (6th Cir. 2006)
    United States v. Tate, 516 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2008)
    United States v. Brinley, 684 F.3d 629 (6th Cir. 2012)
    United States v. Pritchett, 749 F.3d 417 (6th Cir. 2014)
    United States v. Reid, 751 F.3d 763 (6th Cir. 2014)
    United States v. Fields, 763 F.3d 443 (6th Cir. 2014).

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1986, Tennessee
    1987, U.S. Tax Court
    1990, U.S. Claims Court
    1991, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
    1995, U.S. Supreme Court
    1996, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
    2000, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
    Memberships
    Memphis (Chairman, Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee, 1998-1999
    Chairman, Legal Fee Dispute Committee, 2000
    Co-Chair, CLE Committee, 2001-2002) and Tennessee Bar Associations
    National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
    Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
    Leo Bearman, Sr. American Inn of Court (Barrister, 1997-2000).
    Bar Fellowship
    Memphis Bar Foundation.
  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Memphis State University
    Class of 1986
    J.D.
    Other Education
    University of Rochester
    Class of 1983
    B.A.
  • Personal Details & History
    Age
    Born in 1961
    Buffalo, New York, August 12, 1961

Email Michael James Stengel

Case type is required.
A valid zip code is required.
A valid city is required.
State is required.
Country is required.
Outside the US or Canada?
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

Contact Information

First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
City:
State:
Country:
Case Description:
Contact Information
First Name:
Last Name:
Email:
Phone Number:
Return to Profile
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions