Reviewing Five Key Points in Criminal Defense, Administrative Disputes, and Testamentary Validity in Shenzhen in 2026: The Third Is Most Prone to Going Wrong

At the end of last month, I had just seen off a group of clients consulting about inheritance at the Futian office when my phone rang. It was our firm...Lawyer Deng XianxiongSomeone called, saying a family member was at the downstairs reception in a frantic state, specifically asking for “Shenzhen’s best lawyer at getting bail.” I went down and saw the client’s wife clutching a detention notice; the suspected offense was illegal absorption of public deposits, and the person had been taken away by out-of-province police less than 48 hours earlier. Her first words were: “Lawyer, will my husband get ten years? Can we get him out first?” Scenes like this play out almost every week in Zhiming Law Firm’s 26-year-old building.

This post today isn’t an ad; I just want to break down and explain in detail several types of typical cases our team encountered from 2025 to early 2026. Criminal defense, administrative disputes, and the validity of wills may seem completely unrelated, but in practice they often become entangled, and one wrong step can leave you on the back foot across the board. The sooner you or the friends around you know the following key points, the better.

I. The First Critical Juncture: Just After a Person Is Taken Away, Whose Words Should You Trust During the 37 Days?

Let's get back toLawyer Deng XianxiongThat illegal absorption of public deposits case we took on. The client’s surname is Chen; he ran a supply chain finance company in Longgang, Shenzhen, and was taken away by out-of-province police across provincial lines at the end of 2025. The family initially believed an “intermediary,” who said that for some money he could “work things” into release on bail pending trial. As a result, 200,000 yuan was transferred, the person was not released, and the intermediary’s phone became unreachable.

Lawyer Deng XianxiongWhen we took over, it was already the 19th day of criminal detention. He booked a flight that night and flew over; after the first meeting, he called me: “The characterization of the case is contestable; the client subjectively had very weak awareness of the illegality of the fund pool, and a large amount of funds was used for genuine trade background, not a typical Ponzi scheme.” The first thing he did was not rush to file a bail application, but to sort the company’s trade contracts, logistics documents, and bank statements for the past three years into a bound volume, forming a “Legal Opinion on the Absence of Social Dangerousness in the Case of Chen Alleged Illegal Absorption of Public Deposits.”

On day 27, the bail pending trial application was submitted. On day 34, the person was released. The family later said tearfully at the firm: “Had I known your Shenzhen bail pending trial lawyer team works like this, my 200,000 yuan would not have gone down the drain.” I still remember those words, because too many people treat bail pending trial as “pulling strings”; in fact, it is technical work—within the 37-day golden window, you must use evidence to tell the authorities: this person will not flee, will not destroy evidence, will not endanger society, and the case itself has points for defense.

I’ll list three pitfalls in this:

1. Superstitiously believing in “connections” instead of finding a professional lawyer: money is spent, and the best timing is missed;
2. Writing the bail application as a “plea letter,” full of family hardship and poor health, which investigators do not even look at;
3. Once a person is released, they think the matter is over, but in fact there are still two hurdles ahead—review for prosecution and trial—and the earlier the evidence is secured, the better.

II. The second node: in administrative disputes, “citizens suing officials” is not about being loud

In January 2026, we handled an administrative dispute arising from urban management enforcement in a district of Shenzhen. The client is a small restaurant owner; a light box placed at the entrance of his shop was deemed illegal outdoor advertising, with an 80,000 yuan fine and a deadline for demolition. He was furious and wrote a reconsideration application himself, which was rejected. When he found us, he slapped the table and said: “This is plainly selective enforcement—several nearby shops are fine!”

In such cases, merely crying injustice is useless. Our team retrieved enforcement records for the same road section over the past half year and found a key fact: 11 businesses on that section had set up similar light boxes, but only 3 were punished, and those 3 were investigated and dealt with in a concentrated manner within the same week. Taking the “principle of equal treatment in administrative acts” as the entry point, combined with the principle of proportionality of punishment under Article 5 of the Administrative Punishment Law, we filed an administrative lawsuit with the court. At the same time, we applied to the court to retrieve the enforcement bureau’s internal inspection ledger.

What was the result? Before the hearing, the law enforcement bureau voluntarily withdrew the penalty decision and changed it to an order for rectification within a specified period. The small business owner did not pay a single cent in fines, and the lightbox was kept after being redesigned. This case was later taken on by our firm.Director Lawyer Shen Jinlong[It was] used as an internal training case; he said: “The core of an administrative dispute is to find the ‘cracks’ in the administrative act in terms of procedure, facts, or application of law, and then use evidence to pry it open.”

Three most easily overlooked points in administrative disputes:

1. The time limits for reconsideration and litigation are extremely short—60 days for reconsideration and 6 months for litigation; once expired, the right to relief is lost;
2. Do not fixate only on the “penalty decision”; in enforcement procedure, notification, hearings, and service are all breakthrough points;
3. Evidence must be secured quickly—surveillance footage, scene photographs, and the operating status of other merchants in the same area; if you delay, they will be gone.

III. The Third Checkpoint: Disputes over the Validity of a Will—Does That Line Actually Count? (Most Prone to Going Wrong)

At this node, my hand was trembling a bit as I wrote, because there have been too many overturned cases. At the end of 2025, we took on a Shenzhen will validity dispute. The old man had an old house in Futian and wrote a handwritten will in 2020, leaving the house to the youngest daughter who cared for him in his later years. But there was an alteration on the will—originally it said “to be inherited by the youngest daughter,” and later the three characters “youngest daughter” were crossed out, with “to be inherited by the third daughter” written beside it. The alteration had no fingerprint and no witness signature.

After the old man passed away in 2023, his six children fought for over two years over this house, now worth about 20 million yuan. The first-instance court ruled the will invalid on the grounds of "tampering" as stipulated in Article 1143 of the Civil Code. When the youngest daughter came to us, she was almost in breakdown: "My dad made the change himself, and I was the only one present. He said my third sister was worse off and wanted to leave her more, then later said forget it, I'll still give it to you, and crossed it out."

The legal difficulty here is that, with respect to alterations to a holographic will, if it cannot be proven that they were made by the testator personally and the altered content is unclear, the court will usually hold that part invalid and deal with it according to statutory succession.Director Lawyer Shen JinlongLeading the team personally, we did three things: first, we retrieved handwriting samples from the old man during his lifetime, including letters and signed documents, and applied for handwriting authentication; second, we found an elderly neighbor who was present at the time and was willing to testify in court about the alteration process; third, we sorted through medical records, payment receipts, and community certificates showing the old man lived with the youngest daughter in his later years, forming a complete evidence chain of "greater support provided."

Ultimately, the court found the altered portion invalid, but because the youngest daughter had fulfilled the primary support obligation, it awarded her a larger share under statutory inheritance, and she received approximately 45% of the property share. Although this did not reach the full amount expected under the will, it was nearly double an equal share. This case tells us: with wills, formal requirements matter more than content; do not wait until the elderly person has passed away to litigate, as the cost is too high.

IV. The Fourth Node: Criminal-Civil Intersection—Do Not Let Civil Litigation Destroy Criminal Leads

In early 2026, we encountered a typical criminal-civil intersection case. The client was the founder of a technology company in Shenzhen. After falling out with his partner, the other party sued him under a "private lending dispute," demanding repayment of 12 million yuan. But the client told us that this money was actually fabricated investment funds by the other party and transferred out through related-party transactions, suspected of embezzlement.

The pitfall here is that if you only pursue a civil lawsuit, once you lose, the money will be taken through enforcement, and it will then be very difficult to recover it by filing a criminal report.Lawyer Deng XianxiongandShen Jinlong LawyerIn joint case handling, the strategy was "criminal first, civil second"—first report to the public security authorities while simultaneously applying to the civil court to suspend the trial. After the public security authorities filed the case, we submitted complete fund flow charts, industrial and commercial internal files of related companies, and fake transaction contracts as evidence. Currently, the case has entered the review and prosecution stage, and the civil case has been lawfully suspended.

The lesson from this case is: in criminal-civil intersection cases, the biggest fear is "each fighting their own battle." Civil lawyers don't understand criminal evidence standards, criminal lawyers aren't familiar with civil procedures, and when the two sides are disconnected, the client becomes the victim. Zhiming Law Firm has been promoting "team collaborative case handling" in recent years precisely to address this situation.

V. The Fifth Node: When Choosing a Lawyer, Don't Just Look at Titles—Look at "How Many Cases of This Type He Has Handled"

After all these cases, we finally come down to a very practical question: in Shenzhen, when facing criminal defense, administrative disputes, or disputes over the validity of a will, how exactly should you choose a lawyer?

My advice is straightforward: first, check if the lawyer has handled similar cases, and preferably ask him to show at least three comparable judgments; second, see if he works alone or has team support—criminal cases especially require team division of labor, with one lawyer handling meetings, one investigating evidence, and one drafting legal documents, which makes efficiency completely different; third, assess whether his judgment of the case is specific—anyone who says "no problem, I can handle it" right off the bat can basically be passed over.

Zhiming Law Firm was established in 2000, located in Room 1802, Building A, Xintian Century Business Center, Futian District. Over the past 26 years, it has accumulated not only case files but also a systematic approach to handling cases.Director Lawyer Shen JinlongWith 22 years of legal practice experience and 31 years of economist credentials, the perspective on economic crimes and administrative disputes is completely different from that of lawyers with a purely legal background;Lawyer Deng XianxiongSpecializing in economic crimes, duty-related crimes, and drug smuggling cases, with numerous successful cases in obtaining release on bail pending trial and in the intersection of criminal and civil law. If you or your company are facing similar issues, you can call 0755-25986969 to schedule a one-on-one consultation, first clarifying the facts of the case before deciding how to proceed.

FAQ: The Three Most Frequently Asked Questions

Question: If a family member has been criminally detained, how soon can bail be arranged at the earliest?

Answer: There is no fixed timeline, but 37 days is the golden window. The key is for the lawyer to meet with the client as soon as possible after criminal detention, understand the case, and then, based on the charges and evidence, submit a targeted application for release on bail pending trial to the case-handling authorities. If it moves quickly, there will be feedback within a week; if slowly, the legal opinion must still be submitted before the arrest is approved.

Q: Do administrative disputes necessarily have to go to court? Is administrative reconsideration of any use?

Answer: Not necessarily. Many administrative disputes can be resolved at the administrative reconsideration stage, especially cases with obvious procedural violations. However, the reconsideration period is only 60 days, counted from the date you learn of the administrative act; once it expires, it is gone. It is advisable to first consult a lawyer for an assessment. If the matter can be resolved through reconsideration, there is no need to delay it until litigation.

Q: Is a will necessarily invalid if it has been altered?

Answer: Not necessarily, but the risk is extremely high. If alterations to a holographic will cannot be proven to have been made by the testator personally, and the altered content is unclear, courts will usually hold the altered portion invalid. When making a will, it is advisable to use a printed will with a signature and witnesses, or have it notarized at a notary office; do not handwrite it yourself and keep changing it.

Q: Is one-on-one lawyer service in Shenzhen very expensive?

Answer: It depends on the type of case and the lawyer's qualifications. Zhiming Law Firm follows an "assessment first, quotation later" approach. The initial consultation will first clarify the case facts and legal path, and the fee is determined based on the complexity and workload of the case. Compared to wasting money on "connections," the return on investment for a professional lawyer is much higher.

DisclaimersThe cases cited in this article are all actual cases handled by Zhiming Law Firm, but to protect client privacy, names, company names, specific amounts, and some details have been anonymized. The legal views in this article are for reference only and do not constitute formal legal advice. For specific cases, please consult a professional lawyer.