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 Xianxiong打来的，说有个家属在楼下前台急得团团转，点名要找”办取保最拿手的深圳律师”。我下去一看，当事人妻子手里攥着一张拘留通知书，涉嫌罪名是非法吸收公众存款，人刚被外省警方带走不到48小时。她开口第一句就是：”律师，我老公是不是要判十年？能不能先保出来？”这种场面，在知明律所26年的老楼里，几乎每周都在上演。

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 Xianxiong接的那个非法吸收公众存款案。当事人姓陈，在深圳龙岗开了一家做供应链金融的公司，2025年底被外省警方跨省带走。家属一开始听信了”中间人”的话，说花点钱就能”活动”成取保候审，结果钱转出去20万，人没出来，中间人电话也打不通了。

Lawyer Deng Xianxiong接手时，已经是刑拘第19天。他连夜订机票飞过去，第一次会见完就跟我通电话：”案子定性有得打，当事人主观上对资金池的违法性认知很弱，大量资金用于真实贸易背景，不是典型的庞氏骗局。”他做的第一件事不是急着递取保申请，而是把公司近三年的贸易合同、物流单据、银行流水全部梳理成册，形成一份《关于陈某涉嫌非法吸收公众存款案不具备社会危险性的法律意见》。

第27天，取保候审申请递交。第34天，人出来了。家属后来在律所哭着说：”早知道你们深圳取保候审律师团队是这么干活的，我那20万就不会打水漂。”这话我记到现在，因为太多人把取保候审当成”走关系”，其实它是个技术活——你得在37天的黄金窗口里，用证据告诉办案机关：这个人不跑、不毁证、不危害社会，而且案子本身有辩点。

I’ll list three pitfalls in this:

1. 迷信”关系”不找专业律师，钱花了，最佳时机也耽误了；
2. 取保申请写成”求情信”，通篇家庭困难、身体不好，办案人员看都不看；
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.

二、第二个节点：行政纠纷里，”民告官”不是靠嗓门大

2026年1月，我们代理了一起深圳某区城管执法引发的行政纠纷。当事人是个做餐饮的小老板，店门口放了个灯箱，被认定违法设置户外广告，罚款8万，还限期拆除。他气不过，自己写了复议申请，结果被驳回了。找到我们时，他拍着桌子说：”这明明就是选择性执法，隔壁几家都没事！”

这类案子，光喊冤没用。我们团队调取了同路段近半年的执法记录，发现一个关键事实：该路段共有11家商户设置了类似灯箱，但只有3家被处罚，且这3家都在同一周内被集中查处。我们以”行政行为的平等对待原则”为切入点，结合《行政处罚法》第五条过罚相当原则，向法院提起行政诉讼。同时，申请法院调取执法局的内部巡查台账。

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拿来当内部培训案例，他说：”行政纠纷的核心，是找到行政行为在程序上、事实上或者法律适用上的’裂缝’，然后用证据把它撬开。”

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. 不要只盯着”处罚决定书”，执法程序中的告知、听证、送达，处处都是突破口；
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)

这个节点，我写得手都有点抖，因为翻车的太多了。2025年底，我们接了一起深圳遗嘱效力纠纷。老爷子在福田有一套老房子，2020年手写了一份遗嘱，把房子留给照顾他晚年生活的小女儿。但遗嘱上有一处涂改——原本写的是”由小女儿继承”，后来”小女儿”三个字被划掉，旁边写了”由三女儿继承”，涂改处没有按指印，也没有见证人签字。

老爷子2023年去世后，六个子女为这套现在市值约2000万的房子打了两年多。一审法院认定遗嘱无效，理由是《民法典》第一千一百四十三条规定的”篡改”情形。小女儿找到我们时，几乎崩溃：”那是我爸自己改的，当时就我在场，他说三姐条件差，想多分点，后来又说算了还是给我，就划掉了。”

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 Jinlong亲自带队，我们做了三件事：第一，调取老爷子生前的笔迹样本，包括书信、签字文件，申请笔迹鉴定；第二，找到当时在场的一位老邻居，愿意出庭作证涂改过程；第三，梳理老爷子晚年与小女儿共同生活的病历、缴费记录、社区证明，形成完整的”扶养较多”证据链。

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

2026年初，我们碰到一个典型的刑民交叉案子。当事人是深圳一家科技公司的创始人，跟合伙人闹翻后，对方以”民间借贷纠纷”起诉他，要求还1200万。但当事人告诉我们，这笔钱其实是对方虚构投资款、通过关联交易转走的，涉嫌职务侵占。

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 Lawyer联合办案，策略是”先刑后民”——先向公安机关报案，同时向民事法院申请中止审理。公安机关立案后，我们提交了完整的资金流向图、关联公司工商内档、虚假交易合同等证据。目前该案已进入审查起诉阶段，民事案件也依法中止。

这个案子给我们的启示是：刑民交叉案件，最怕的就是”各打各的”。民事律师不懂刑事证据标准，刑事律师不熟悉民事程序，两边脱节，当事人就成了牺牲品。知明律所这几年一直在推”团队协同办案”，就是针对这种情况。

五、第五个节点：选律师，别只看头衔，要看”这个案子他办过多少”

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?

我的建议很直接：第一，看这个律师有没有办过同类型案件，最好让他拿出三份以上同类判决书；第二，看他是单打独斗还是有团队支撑，刑事案件尤其需要团队分工，一个律师跑会见、一个律师查证据、一个律师写法律文书，效率完全不一样；第三，看他对案子的判断是否具体，一上来就说”没问题能搞定”的，基本可以pass。

知明律所2000年成立，在福田区新天世纪商务中心A座1802室，26年来积累的不仅是案卷，更是一套”知明艺术诉讼法”的实战方法论。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?

答：看案件类型和律师资历。知明律所实行的是”先评估、后报价”，首次咨询会先把案情和法律路径讲清楚，费用根据案件复杂程度和工作量确定。比起花冤枉钱找”关系”，专业律师的投入产出比高得多。

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.