The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentencing of Liza Garcia in a drug-related money laundering case, rejecting her challenge to the district court's calculation of her base offense level. The per curiam decision, filed January 8, 2026, upholds Garcia's guilty plea and subsequent sentencing in connection with a cross-border narcotics smuggling operation.
Garcia had pleaded guilty to money laundering charges related to her role in recruiting individuals to transport narcotics from Mexico into the United States. The case originated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, where Garcia was prosecuted under case number 7:21-CR-1019-2.
According to court documents, Garcia worked alongside an unindicted coconspirator, described as her boyfriend, to recruit David Apaseo for the drug transportation scheme. Apaseo, who was romantically involved with Garcia's daughter, agreed to transport narcotics across the border into Texas.
The operation came to an end in April 2021 when Apaseo was arrested at a border checkpoint in Hidalgo, Texas. During the arrest, officers discovered a substantial cache of illegal drugs concealed within automobile parts in Apaseo's vehicle. The seized narcotics included cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, and fentanyl, representing a multi-drug trafficking operation spanning the U.S.-Mexico border.
Following his arrest, Apaseo provided investigators with detailed information about the scope of the trafficking operation. In a post-arrest interview, he revealed that his mission was to transport the narcotics to Houston, Texas. More significantly, Apaseo disclosed that this was not an isolated incident, but part of a broader pattern of drug trafficking activities.
Apaseo told investigators that he had previously completed multiple trips for the organization, transporting narcotics from Mexico to various Texas cities including Austin, Houston, and Dallas. This information suggested that Garcia's operation was more extensive than initially apparent, involving regular shipments to major metropolitan areas across Texas.
The case highlights the ongoing challenges federal prosecutors face in combating cross-border drug trafficking operations that often involve multiple participants and sophisticated concealment methods. Garcia's role in recruiting transporters demonstrates how organizers of such operations often remain several steps removed from the actual border crossings while still playing crucial roles in the overall conspiracy.
Garcia's appeal focused specifically on challenging the district court's calculation of her base offense level under federal sentencing guidelines. Base offense levels serve as the starting point for determining sentences in federal criminal cases, with various factors potentially increasing or decreasing the final sentence. Garcia's legal team apparently argued that the district court erred in its calculation, though the specific nature of their objections was not detailed in the available court documents.
The Fifth Circuit panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Smith, Stewart, and Haynes, rejected Garcia's arguments in their brief per curiam opinion. Per curiam decisions are issued by the court as a whole rather than being authored by a single judge, and typically indicate that the legal issues presented were relatively straightforward or well-settled.
The decision represents another example of appellate courts upholding money laundering convictions in cases involving drug trafficking operations. Federal money laundering statutes are frequently used in drug cases because they allow prosecutors to target not just those who handle the drugs directly, but also those involved in the financial aspects of trafficking operations.
Garcia's case also illustrates the federal government's continued focus on dismantling drug trafficking networks that span the U.S.-Mexico border. The involvement of multiple Texas cities in Apaseo's previous trips suggests that this particular operation had developed distribution networks across a significant portion of the state.
The Fifth Circuit's affirmation of Garcia's conviction and sentencing sends a clear message that courts will uphold sentences for those who play organizational roles in drug trafficking operations, even when they may not directly handle the narcotics themselves. The decision also demonstrates that appellate courts are generally reluctant to disturb district court sentencing calculations absent clear legal error.
The case originated from the Southern District of Texas, which has jurisdiction over a significant portion of the U.S.-Mexico border and frequently handles cases involving cross-border drug trafficking. The district court's handling of the sentencing calculation was apparently thorough enough to withstand appellate scrutiny, as the Fifth Circuit found no error in the lower court's approach.
With the Fifth Circuit's affirmation, Garcia's conviction and sentence become final unless she chooses to petition the Supreme Court for review. However, the brief nature of the appellate court's opinion and its per curiam status suggest that the legal issues presented were not particularly novel or complex, making Supreme Court review unlikely.
The case serves as a reminder of the serious federal penalties that can result from participation in drug trafficking operations, particularly those involving money laundering charges that allow prosecutors to target the financial infrastructure supporting narcotics distribution networks.