Skip to main content

Laredo lawyer admits paying nearly $50,000 in drug-trafficking proceeds to ensure drug defendant's silence

DALLAS - A lawyer practicing in Laredo, Texas, pleaded guilty on Thursday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Irma C. Ramirez to a one-count Information charging interstate travel in aid of racketeering, announced U.S. Attorney James T. Jacks of the Northern District of Texas. The case was investigated by U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

Alonzo Ramos, 40, who is free on bond, faces a statutory maximum sentence of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. In addition, according to the plea agreement, he will surrender "any and all of his licenses to practice law, and he shall cease practicing law." Sentencing is set for July 5 before U.S. District Judge Sam A. Lindsay.

According to court documents, in January 2008, L.T., who was arrested and detained in Louisiana for drug trafficking, informed federal authorities that Alonzo Ramos visit him at the jail unexpectedly. L.T. explained that Ramos visited him to ensure that he was not cooperating with authorities. Afterwards, federal authorities began recording phone calls between L.T. and Ramos.

In a phone call on March 5, 2008, Ramos offered to facilitate a monetary payment to L.T. that was the proceeds of drug trafficking. In a subsequent phone call that day, Ramos and L.T. discussed putting a relative of L.T. in touch with Ramos to receive the payment and Ramos promised to visit L.T. later in the week.

On March 7, 2008, Ramos traveled to Louisiana from Texas, via the Northern District of Texas, and met L.T. at the jail in to distribute the drug proceeds. During this meeting, Ramos informed L.T. that he had received $48,500 in drug trafficking proceeds and that the money was at his house in Laredo. The two then discussed the details of how the money would be transferred, agreeing that the money would be given to L.T.'s relative.

During a phone call on March 8, 2008, Ramos told L.T. to have his relative contact him; however, unbeknownst to Ramos, L.T.'s relative was also cooperating with law enforcement. On March 13, 2008, the relative phoned Ramos who instructed him to meet him at a location in Laredo. Later that day, Ramos gave L.T.'s relative the $48,500 at the prearranged location and the relative surrendered the cash to federal law enforcement authorities.

Deputy Criminal Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney Gary Tromblay, Northern District of Texas, is in charge of the prosecution.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...