Score:   1
Docket Number:   CD-CA  2:19-cr-00680
Case Name:   USA v. Lozada et al
  Press Releases:
          LOS ANGELES – One man and two women are scheduled to be arraigned this morning on federal charges of defrauding elderly women by convincing the victims they needed financial assistance to cash purported winning lottery tickets.

          A federal grand jury indictment returned on November 12 charges a total of four defendants with conspiracy to commit wire fraud for their roles in a multi-year scheme that targeted elderly female victims, robbing them of cash and other valuables in a scheme known as the “Latin Lotto Scam.”

          The three defendants scheduled for arraignment today in United States District Court in downtown Los Angeles are:

Luisa Camargo, 38;

Mercedes Montanez, 68; and

Tito Lozada, 49.

          These defendants – all Colombian nationals who reside in the Los Angeles area – were arrested in Long Beach and are being held in federal custody without bond after initially being arrested on state charges filed by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office. After the United States Attorney’s Office filed a criminal complaint in late October, the three defendants in Los Angeles were transferred to federal custody on November 5.

          The fourth defendant in this case – Maria Luisa Henao, 43, who recently became a U.S. citizen – was arrested in San Diego and arrived in Los Angeles on November 18, when she was arraigned on the indictment. Henao pleaded not guilty, was ordered held without bond, and was ordered to stand trial on January 14.

          The four defendants are linked to at least 11 incidents in which an older woman was approached by a combination of the defendants who falsely claimed that one of the co-conspirators had a winning lottery ticket and needed help cashing the ticket.

          As part of the scheme outlined in court documents, the defendants pretended to call lottery officials, who actually were co-conspirators. The purported lottery officials falsely confirmed to victims that they were looking at winning lottery tickets, but the funds would be released only if a deposit or fee was paid in advance. At that point, another defendant engaged with the victim and, knowing the lottery ticket was worthless, would offer to help cash the ticket. This allegedly served to encourage victims to contribute money or jewelry for the ticket’s deposit or fee. The defendants would then drive the victims to their homes and/or to their banks so the victims could get money and other valuables.

          The defendants falsely told victims that other people agreed to contribute money to fully fund the ticket’s deposit or fee, and then dropped victims outside a random residence where the defendants falsely claimed the remainder of the funds would be delivered. At that point, the defendants would flee with the victim’s money, jewelry, and other valuables.

          The indictment specifically charges the defendants with defrauding six victims; however, the Major Theft Task Force in Los Angeles and its partners have linked the defendants to at least 11 incidents since 2017 in the Southern California communities of Long Beach, Maywood, Baldwin Park, Hawaiian Gardens, Fontana, Lakewood, San Pedro and Chula Vista. One incident allegedly took place in the Bay Area city of Vallejo.

          “This was an organized group that singled out older women for the sole purpose of ripping off these vulnerable victims with bogus promises of a big payday,” said United States Attorney Nick Hanna. “While law enforcement will do everything possible to bring criminals like this to justice, this case should serve as a reminder to potential victims and their family members that no one should ever pay an upfront fee in relation to any prize, sweepstakes or lottery.”

          “Our elderly community is often a convenient and lucrative target for con artists and, while we’ve charged some of the perpetrators in this case, we know many others are at work to take their place,” said Paul Delacourt, the Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office. “Educating ourselves, as well as our aging family members and friends, is crucial so that they can take precautions and avoid victimization.”

          “It is important that we stop these financial predators, especially when they target elderly victims within the Spanish-speaking community,” said San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan. “I am proud of our investigators, who collaborated with local and federal law enforcement to bring down this network of thieves preying on victims in supermarket parking lots.”

          “Not in our city,” said Los Angeles Chief of Police Michel Moore. “We will collaborate with our law enforcement partners at all levels and across jurisdictions to ensure this scam targeting elderly victims comes to an end.”

          The indictment also names defendant Lozada in a separate count charging him with possessing device-making equipment, commonly known as a credit card reader/writer and used to replicate credit cards to commit fraud and identify theft.

          An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

          If convicted of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, each defendant would face a statutory maximum penalty of 20 years in federal prison.

          This case is a result of a joint and continuing investigation by the FBI’s Major Theft Task Force in Los Angeles, which is comprised of FBI agents and Los Angeles Police Department detectives. San Diego County District Attorney investigators were instrumental in identifying the defendants in this case and tying the San Diego County incident to several others in California. The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office provided considerable assistance during this investigation.

          This case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorneys Ian Yanniello and Anna Farias-Eisner of the General Crimes Section.

Docket (0 Docs):   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XZP7hw2fZyPt6loxiPs5GNqZBxuLV9COn_UDhaKBdFc
  Last Updated: 2024-04-10 22:39:44 UTC
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
Magistrate Docket Number:   CD-CA  2:19-mj-04538
Case Name:   USA v. Lozada et al
Description: The fiscal year of the data file obtained from the AOUSC
Format: YYYY

Description: The code of the federal judicial circuit where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the federal judicial district where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: The code of the district office where the case was located
Format: A2

Description: Docket number assigned by the district to the case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which cannot be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a case which can be modified by the court
Format: A3

Description: A sequential number indicating whether a case is an original proceeding or a reopen
Format: N5

Description: Case type associated with the current defendant record
Format: A2

Description: Case type associated with a magistrate case if the current case was merged from a magistrate case
Format: A2

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, defendant number, and reopen sequence number
Format: A18

Description: A concatenation of district, office, docket number, case type, and reopen sequence number
Format: A15

Description: The docket number originally given to a case assigned to a magistrate judge and subsequently merged into a criminal case
Format: A7

Description: A unique number assigned to each defendant in a magistrate case
Format: A3

Description: The status of the defendant as assigned by the AOUSC
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the fugitive status of a defendant
Format: A1

Description: The date upon which a defendant became a fugitive
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which a fugitive defendant was taken into custody
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date when a case was first docketed in the district court
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which proceedings in a case commenced on charges pending in the district court where the defendant appeared, or the date of the defendant’s felony-waiver of indictment
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code used to identify the nature of the proceeding
Format: N2

Description: The date when a defendant first appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: A code indicating the event by which a defendant appeared before a judicial officer in the district court where a charge was pending
Format: A2

Description: A code indicating the type of legal counsel assigned to a defendant
Format: N2

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE1
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE1
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE1
Format: A3

Description: The title and section of the U.S. Code applicable to the offense committed which carried the second highest severity
Format: A20

Description: A code indicating the level of offense associated with FTITLE2
Format: N2

Description: The four digit AO offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: The four digit D2 offense code associated with FTITLE2
Format: A4

Description: A code indicating the severity associated with FTITLE2
Format: A3

Description: The FIPS code used to indicate the county or parish where an offense was committed
Format: A5

Description: The date of the last action taken on the record
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which judicial proceedings before the court concluded
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the final sentence is recorded on the docket
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The date upon which the case was closed
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: The total fine imposed at sentencing for all offenses of which the defendant was convicted and a fine was imposed
Format: N8

Description: A count of defendants filed including inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed excluding inter-district transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings commenced
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants filed whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated including interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated excluding interdistrict transfers
Format: N1

Description: A count of original proceedings terminated
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants terminated whose proceedings commenced by reopen, remand, appeal, or retrial
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period including long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: A count of defendants pending as of the last day of the period excluding long term fugitives
Format: N1

Description: The source from which the data were loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: A10

Description: A sequential number indicating the iteration of the defendant record
Format: N2

Description: The date the record was loaded into the AOUSC’s NewSTATS database
Format: YYYYMMDD

Description: Statistical year ID label on data file obtained from the AOUSC which represents termination year
Format: YYYY

Data imported from FJC Integrated Database
F U C K I N G P E D O S R E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E