Three illegal immigrants charged after fiery Texas crash leaves one dead
Three illegal immigrants have been charged in connection with a deadly drunk-driving crash Saturday night on a highway in Arlington, Texas.
According to the Arlington Police Department, 25-year-old Cesar Ramirez Castro was driving a Ford-150 when he swerved onto the shoulder of I-20, slamming the truck into a parked vehicle.
The vehicle then collided with a concrete barrier, setting it ablaze.
When the fire was extinguished, a 22-year-old man was found dead inside the vehicle.
Venezuela To Resume Accepting Us Deportation Flights
Police charged Ramirez Castro with one count of intoxication manslaughter and one count of collision involving death.
Read On The Fox News App
According to jail records, he has an immigration hold.
Two passengers in the vehicle, 30-year-old Marcelino Ramirez-Ramirez and 24-year-old Daniel Castro Zammarron, were both arrested on one count of public intoxication.
Democrat Mayor Blasted For Vowing To Make Major City 'Safe Haven' For Illegal Immigrants
Both men also have immigration holds.
Last week, an illegal immigrant living in Georgia was charged with capital murder after allegedly killing Camilia Williams, a 52-year-old mother of five and grandmother.
David Hector Rivas-Sagastume, 21, a Honduran national, has been charged with capital murder.
He was caught and released while crossing illegally into the United States under Biden administration policies in 2021. He was scheduled for removal from the country in 2023, but removal proceedings never occurred.Original article source: Three illegal immigrants charged after fiery Texas crash leaves one dead
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal appeals court to hear arguments in Trump's long-shot effort to fight hush money conviction
Five months after President Donald Trump was sentenced without penalty in the New York hush money case, his attorneys will square off again with prosecutors Wednesday in one of the first major tests of the Supreme Court's landmark presidential immunity decision. Trump is relying heavily on the high court's divisive 6-3 immunity ruling from July in a long-shot bid to get his conviction reviewed – and ultimately overturned – by federal courts. After being convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, Trump in January became the first felon to ascend to the presidency in US history. Even after Trump was reelected and federal courts became flooded with litigation tied to his second term, the appeals in the hush money case have chugged forward in multiple courts. A three-judge panel of the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals – all named to the bench by Democratic presidents – will hear arguments Wednesday in one of those cases. Trump will be represented on Wednesday by Jeffrey Wall, a private lawyer and Supreme Court litigator who served as acting solicitor general during Trump's first administration. Many of the lawyers who served on Trump's defense team in the hush money case have since taken top jobs within the Justice Department. The case stems from the 2023 indictment announced by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, a Democrat, who accused Trump of falsely categorizing payments he said were made to quash unflattering stories during the 2016 election. Trump was accused of falsifying a payment to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to cover up a $130,000 payment Cohen made to adult-film star Stormy Daniels to keep her from speaking out before the 2016 election about an alleged affair with Trump. (Trump has denied the affair.) Trump was ultimately convicted last year and was sentenced without penalty in January, days before he took office. The president is now attempting to move that case to federal court, where he is betting he'll have an easier shot at arguing that the Supreme Court's immunity decision in July will help him overturn the conviction. Trump's earlier attempts to move the case to federal court have been unsuccessful. US District Judge Alvin Hellerstein, nominated by President Bill Clinton, denied the request in September – keeping Trump's case in New York courts instead. The 2nd Circuit will now hear arguments on Trump's appeal of that decision on Wednesday. 'He's lost already several times in the state courts,' said David Shapiro, a former prosecutor and now a lecturer at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. And Trump's long-running battle with New York Judge Juan Merchan, Shapiro said, has 'just simmered up through the system' in New York courts in a way that may have convinced Trump that federal courts will be more receptive. Trump, who frequently complained about Merchan, has said he wants his case heard in an 'unbiased federal forum.' Trump's argument hangs largely on a technical but hotly debated section of the Supreme Court's immunity decision last year. Broadly, that decision granted former presidents 'at least presumptive' immunity for official acts and 'absolute immunity' when presidents were exercising their constitutional powers. State prosecutors say the hush money payments were a private matter – not official acts of the president – and so they are not covered by immunity. But the Supreme Court's decision also barred prosecutors from attempting to show a jury evidence concerning a president's official acts, even if they are pursuing alleged crimes involving that president's private conduct. Without that prohibition, the Supreme Court reasoned, a prosecutor could 'eviscerate the immunity' the court recognized by allowing a jury to second-guess a president's official acts. Trump is arguing that is exactly what Bragg did when he called White House officials such as former communications director Hope Hicks and former executive assistant Madeleine Westerhout to testify at his trial. Hicks had testified that Trump felt it would 'have been bad to have that story come out before the election,' which prosecutors later described as the 'nail' in the coffin of the president's defense. Trump's attorneys are also pointing to social media posts the president sent in 2018 denying the Daniels hush money scheme as official statements that should not have been used in the trial. State prosecutors 'introduced into evidence and asked the jury to scrutinize President Trump's official presidential acts,' Trump's attorneys told the appeals court in a filing last month. 'One month after trial, the Supreme Court unequivocally recognized an immunity prohibiting the use of such acts as evidence at any trial of a former president.' A White House spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. If Trump's case is ultimately reviewed by federal courts, that would not change his state law conviction into a federal conviction. Trump would not be able to pardon himself just because a federal court reviews the case. Bragg's office countered that it's too late for federal courts to intervene. Federal officials facing prosecution in state courts may move their cases to federal court in many circumstances under a 19th century law designed to ensure states don't attempt to prosecute them for conduct performed 'under color' of a US office or agency. A federal government worker, for instance, might seek to have a case moved to federal court if they are sued after getting into a car accident while driving on the job. But in this case, Bragg's office argued, Trump has already been convicted and sentenced. That means, prosecutors said, there's really nothing left for federal courts to do. 'Because final judgment has been entered and the state criminal action has concluded, there is nothing to remove to federal district court,' prosecutors told the 2nd Circuit in January. Even if that's not true, they said, seeking testimony from a White House adviser about purely private acts doesn't conflict with the Supreme Court's ruling in last year's immunity case. Bragg's office has pointed to a Supreme Court ruling as well: the 5-4 decision in January that allowed Trump to be sentenced in the hush money case. The president raised many of the same concerns about evidence when he attempted to halt that sentencing before the inauguration. A majority of the Supreme Court balked at that argument in a single sentence that, effectively, said Trump could raise those concerns when he appeals his conviction. That appeal remains pending in state court. 'The alleged evidentiary violations at President-elect Trump's state-court trial,' the Supreme Court wrote, 'can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
US cities brace for more protests as parts of Los Angeles placed under curfew
By Brad Brooks, Phil Stewart, Idrees Ali and Dietrich Knauth LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -Several U.S. cities braced for protests on Wednesday against President Donald Trump's sweeping immigration raids, as parts of the country's second largest city Los Angeles spent the night under curfew in an effort to quell five days of unrest. The Governor of Texas, Republican Greg Abbott, said he will deploy the National Guard this week, ahead of planned protests. Protesters and police in Austin clashed on Monday. Trump's extraordinary measures of sending National Guard and Marines to quell protests in Los Angeles has sparked a national debate on the use of military on U.S. soil and pitted the Republican president against California's Democrat governor. "This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers and even our National Guard at risk. That's when the downward spiral began," California Governor Gavin Newsom said in a video address on Tuesday. "He again chose escalation. He chose more force. He chose theatrics over public safety. ... Democracy is under assault." Newsom, widely seen as preparing for a presidential run in 2028, and the state of California sued Trump and the Defense Department on Monday, seeking to block the deployment of federal troops. Trump in turn has suggested Newsom should be arrested. Hundreds of U.S. Marines arrived in the Los Angeles area on Tuesday under orders from Trump, after he also ordered the deployment of 4,000 National Guard to the city. Marines and National Guard are to be used in the protection of government personnel and buildings and not in police action. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said the deployments were not necessary as police could manage the protest, the majority of which have been peaceful, and limited to about five streets. However, due to looting and violence at night she imposed a curfew over one square mile of the city's downtown, starting Tuesday night. The curfew will last several days. Police said multiple groups stayed on the streets in some areas despite the curfew and "mass arrests" were initiated. Police earlier said that 197 people had already been arrested on Tuesday - more than double the total number of arrests to date. Democratic leaders have raised concerns over a national crisis in what has become the most intense flashpoint yet in the Trump administration's efforts to deport migrants living in the country illegally, and then crack down on opponents who take to the streets in protest. Trump, voted back into office last year largely for his promise to deport undocumented immigrants, used a speech honoring soldiers on Tuesday to defend his decision. He told troops at the army base in Fort Bragg, North Carolina: "Generations of army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third-world lawlessness." 'FULL-BLOWN ASSAULT' "What you're witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order and on national sovereignty, carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags," Trump said, adding his administration would "liberate Los Angeles." Demonstrators have waved the flags of Mexico and other countries in solidarity for the migrants rounded up in a series of intensifying raids. Homeland Security said on Monday its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division had arrested 2,000 immigration offenders per day recently, far above the 311 daily average in fiscal year 2024 under former President Joe Biden. Protests have also taken place in other cities including New York, Atlanta and Chicago, where demonstrators shouted at and scuffled with officers. Some protesters climbed onto the Picasso sculpture in Daley Plaza, while others chanted that ICE should be abolished. Texas Governor Abbott said late on Tuesday that he will deploy the National Guard, which "will use every tool & strategy to help law enforcement maintain order." "Texas National Guard will be deployed to locations across the state to ensure peace & order. Peaceful protest is legal. Harming a person or property is illegal & will lead to arrest," Abbott posted on X. South Texas organizations are expected to hold anti-ICE rallies on Wednesday and Saturday, CNN reported local media as saying. About 700 Marines were in a staging area in the Seal Beach area about 30 miles (50 km) south of Los Angeles on Tuesday, awaiting deployment to specific locations, a U.S. official said. California Attorney General Rob Bonta told Reuters the state was concerned about allowing federal troops to protect personnel, saying there was a risk that could violate an 1878 law that generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement. "Protecting personnel likely means accompanying ICE agents into communities and neighborhoods, and protecting functions could mean protecting the ICE function of enforcing the immigration law," Bonta said. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday posted photos on X of National Guard troops accompanying ICE officers on an immigration raid. Trump administration officials have vowed to redouble the immigration raids in response to the street protests. The last time the military was used for direct police action under the Insurrection Act was in 1992, when the California governor at the time asked President George H.W. Bush to help respond to Los Angeles riots over the acquittal of police officers who beat Black motorist Rodney King.
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
Hey, Democrats: LA riots make Americans like me glad Trump is president
Hey, Democrats: LA riots make Americans like me glad Trump is president | Opinion For many Americans, the protests in Los Angeles look like lawlessness. They also are a reminder of why we didn't want Joe Biden or Kamala Harris for another four years. Show Caption Hide Caption See how Los Angeles protests intensified over one weekend What started as a small protest over immigration raids on Friday ballooned into large demonstrations throughout the weekend. Here's what happened. As I've witnessed photos and videos of the burning cars, masked rioters wielding Mexican flags, blocked freeways and looted stores in Los Angeles in recent days, my conclusion is this: I'm glad Donald Trump is president. And I'm not alone. Voters in November chose Trump in large part to address the surge in illegal immigration that former President Joe Biden allowed to happen for years, letting millions of people flood our borders. Trump has followed through on his campaign promises to close the border and to deport many of these immigrants who've flouted the law. By doing their job, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents purportedly have sparked the mayhem and violence in LA, and which is now spreading to other parts of the country. California Democrats like Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom are wringing their hands that Trump has deployed the National Guard and now the Marines to help quell the violence, even though state and local leaders certainly don't have the situation under control. Rather than call out the bad behavior, Democrats and the news media appear to condone the rioting – and downplay what's actually happening. It's an odd strategy, and one that shows why Democrats continue to struggle to connect with average Americans. Opinion: Can you be legally punished for misgendering someone? Colorado says yes. | Opinion Sen. John Fetterman calls out his own party. I give him credit for that. One Democrat at least gets it. Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman is once again standing up to the craziness within his party and calling it like he sees it. On X, Fetterman posted a photo of a rioter with a Mexican flag standing on a destroyed car surrounded by flames. It looks like a scene out of Gaza – not the United States. I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that. This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement. — U.S. Senator John Fetterman (@SenFettermanPA) June 10, 2025 Fetterman wrote this: 'I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration − but this is not that. This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement.' Fetterman is absolutely correct. For years, Democrats have obsessed over the riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, after Trump lost the 2020 election. Yet, Democrats make themselves look like hypocrites when they are OK with violence that fits with their anti-Trump policy objectives. Opinion: Democrats waste $20 million to learn why they lost men. Here's my free advice. 'Overwhelmingly peaceful' protests? Give me a break, Kamala Harris. Consider some of the responses to the rioting from high-profile Democrats and media figures: ∎ 'The vast majority of protesters and demonstrators are peaceful,' California Sen. Alex Padilla said on MSNBC. 'They're passionate.' ∎ New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker blamed Trump for what's happening. 'A lot of these peaceful protests are being generated because the president of the United States is sowing chaos,' Booker said on 'Meet the Press.' ∎ Former Vice President Kamala Harris and 2024 presidential candidate posted a statement that called the spectacle 'overwhelmingly peaceful' and criticized Trump for 'ICE raids' that are part of the administration's 'cruel, calculated agenda to spread panic and division.' Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. ∎ Not to be left out, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wrote the following on X: 'California Governor Newsom didn't request the National Guard be deployed to his state following peaceful demonstrations. Trump sent them anyway. … Trump's goal isn't to keep Californians safe. His goal is to cause chaos, because chaos is good for Trump.' ∎ Brian Stelter, CNN chief media analyst, shared this quote on X from The American Prospect, a progressive magazine: 'These protests, which have been abbreviated in the media as 'unrest,' were actually a cry of hope, and a reminder of the human need for community, the need to turn to each other to find something to believe in.' You get the idea. Burning vehicles and throwing rocks is somehow peaceful. Attempting to stop the violence and enforce the law is somehow instigating it. But to me, and millions of other Americans watching what's happening in LA, the protests look like lawlessness. They're also a great reminder of why we didn't want Biden (or Harris) for another four years. Ingrid Jacques is a columnist at USA TODAY. Contact her at ijacques@ or on X: @Ingrid_Jacques
