‘Back to square one': Estranged wife of Osceola sheriff to remain jailed in racketeering case
Robin Severance-Lopez has been in the Lake County Jail since June 23, charged with conspiracy to commit racketeering. Prosecutors have accused her of moving proceeds from an illegal gambling operation across several bank accounts she shared with Lopez. She has pleaded not guilty to the charge.
Following her arrest, she was ordered to put up $400,000 in collateral plus pay another 10% to a bondsman to secure her release, with the stipulation that she prove the sources of the funds are legal.
After a three-hour hearing, Circuit Judge Brian Welke ruled Severance-Lopez did not have to pay the additional 10%, but he was not convinced all the money was clean.
Her lawyer, Michelle Yard, said the value of her family's home in Harmony, a check from a relative and two checks from Severance-Lopez's bank account would be enough to cover the bond. As proof her personal money was legal, she also cited 18 months of bank statements from several joint accounts demonstrating the only deposits were from Lopez's income as sheriff, his veteran benefits and a tax refund from the IRS.
Brian Tagler, an undercover task force officer with the Orange County Sheriff's Office whose face was not shown in court, testified there was no evidence illegal money was mixed into the deposits from that period. But state prosecutors argued the money was being supplemented from another source.
'This is a common tactic used in order to … create confusion and hide the source of the excess money,' prosecutor Colleen Moore said. 'All the legitimate income that has been established here is already spent by way or Mrs. Lopez and Mr. Lopez's expenses.'
Yard proposed that Severance-Lopez could use funds from a 2023 property sale totaling $57,000 to make up the difference. Welke, however, punted the issue to at least next week.
'At this point, we're back to square one where we have to get the statewide prosecutor to either agree she has a clean $20,000 or be back for a hearing again,' Yard told reporters outside the Lake County Courthouse.
The prosecutors declined to comment as they left the courtroom.
Six people face charges in what prosecutors described as an illegal gambling empire that began with an illicit casino in Kissimmee called The Eclipse and later expanded into Lake County. Lopez and Severance-Lopez, they allege, played 'ministerial roles' as part of the operation, which allegedly generated $21.6 million.
The extent of the claims are documented in a 255-page affidavit that remains under seal while one co-defendant, Ying Zhang, remains free.
Over the years, prosecutors said Lopez made between $600,000 and $700,000 in illegal proceeds that either went to him personally or as campaign contributions. His involvement purportedly began in 2019, a year before he was elected Osceola's first Hispanic sheriff and continued throughout his tenure at the sheriff's office, where prosecutors contend he used his position to shield The Eclipse and its workers from legal scrutiny.
Prosecutors said Severance-Lopez was found to have withdrawn money on the day of Lopez's arrest and moved it to other accounts. Yard said that money was used to pay bills and put toward her husband's bail. The case against Severance-Lopez, Yard said, hinges on a single email to Zhang containing a W-9 tax form.
At no point, she added, did her client join a criminal enterprise. In fact, she filed for divorce from Lopez in 2023 after being separated since 2019. That proceeding, filed in Brevard County, is ongoing.
'The case looks incredibly weak,' Yard said. 'I think that the weight of the evidence against Robin is abysmal. There is nothing showing that she joined any conspiracy to commit any racketeering activity.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
20 minutes ago
- CNN
Law used to kick out Nazis could be used to strip citizenship from many more Americans
For decades, the US Department of Justice has used a tool to sniff out former Nazis who lied their way into becoming American citizens: a law that allowed the department to denaturalize, or strip, citizenship from criminals who falsified their records or hid their illicit pasts. That power, under the new Trump administration, may be broadening. According to a memo issued by the Justice Department last month, attorneys should aim their denaturalization work to target a much broader swath of individuals – anyone who may 'pose a potential danger to national security.' The directive appears to be a push towards a larger denaturalization effort that fits with the Trump administration's hardline immigration policies. These could leave some of the millions of naturalized American citizens at risk of losing their status and being deported. People who have committed violent crimes, are members or associates of gangs and drug cartels or have committed fraud should also be prioritized, the memo, issued by the head of the DOJ's Civil Division, said. But for many officials and experts, the real concern, they say, is that it is designed to strike fear in the hearts of legal immigrants across the country – particularly those who are at odds with Trump himself. 'The politicization of citizenship rights is something that really worries me, I think it's just flatly inconsistent with our democratic system,' Cassandra Burke Robertson, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University, told CNN. The statute in question is part of a McCarthy-era law first established to root out Communists during the red scare. But its most common use over the years has been against war criminals. In 1979, the Justice Department established a unit that used the statute to deport hundreds of people who assisted the Nazis. Eli Rosenbaum, the man who led it for years, helped the department strip citizenship from or deport 100 people, and earned a reputation as the DOJ's most prolific Nazi hunter. Rosenbaum briefly returned in 2022 to lead an effort to identify and prosecute anyone who committed war crimes in Ukraine. But the department has broadened those efforts beyond Nazis several times, including an Obama-era initiative called Operation Janus targeting those who stole identities to earn citizenship. In 2020, Trump attempted to expand denaturalization efforts by creating a dedicated office at the Justice Department, but it was quietly disbanded by the Biden administration the following year. One former DOJ official called the office a 'branding opportunity,' noting that it was not particularly effective and did not fit with Trump's successor's priorities. Since returning to the White House, Trump has worked to redesign how the federal government enforces immigration in the country, pushing agencies like the FBI and US Marshals to join deportation efforts and targeting foreign student visas for people abroad hoping to attend a private university in the states. Instead of reinstating the stand-alone office from his first administration, the entire Civil Division is now being told to prioritize denaturalization 'in all cases permitted by law,' according to the memo, which also suggests that US attorneys' offices across the country should flag cases where they may be able to initiate denaturalization proceedings. Trump filed 102 denaturalization cases during his first administration, contrasted with the 24 cases filed under Biden, DOJ Spokesperson Chad Gilmartin said on social media Wednesday. So far, the second Trump administration has filed 5 cases in its first five months. The DOJ told CNN in a statement: 'Denaturalization proceedings will only be pursued as permitted by law and supported by evidence against individuals who illegally procured or misrepresented facts in the naturalization process.' But current and former DOJ officials who spoke to CNN said that the beyond instructing lawyers to file as many denaturalization cases as possible, the memo is so broad that it could allow the Justice Department to invoke vague or unsubstantiated claims to expel people from the country. Robertson, of Case Western, warned that the memo could give way to the Trump administration retroactively searching for missteps in the naturalization process of perceived political opponents, like student activists. Irina Manta, a law professor at Hofstra University, said that the administration's move could have a 'chilling effect' on free speech, both political and otherwise. 'I regularly observe the fear firsthand,' she said. Trump has publicly flirted with the notion of deporting American citizens he doesn't want in the country. Though the seriousness of these statements is highly unclear, he has called for everything from deporting 'bad people … many of them [who] were born in our country' to saying his administration should 'take a look' at removing Elon Musk after his erstwhile ally criticized the president's spending bill. At least one ally has taken a more formal step. Last week, Andy Ogles, a Republican congressman, asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani—who was born in Uganda and naturalized in 2018— should be subject to denaturalization proceedings because he 'publicly glorifies' people connected to Hamas in a rap song. Bondi has not publicly responded to the letter.
Washington Post
27 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The Supreme Court and Congress cede powers to Trump and the presidency
The Supreme Court last week sharply curtailed the ability of federal judges to block a presidential action nationwide, even if they find it unconstitutional. That followed its decision last year granting the president broad immunity from prosecution for crimes committed in the course of his core duties.
New York Times
27 minutes ago
- New York Times
What Sean Combs Got Away With
The most haunting image of the Sean Combs trial for many of us will be the video of him, wearing a towel and striped socks, kicking and dragging a limp Casandra 'Cassie' Ventura down the hall of the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles. It's haunting on its own terms, witnessing such abuse. But it's also haunting now that the trial is over, knowing that Mr. Combs could not be convicted of that behavior, because of failures in our legal system. On Wednesday, Mr. Combs was acquitted on the most serious charges against him: sex trafficking and racketeering. A jury convicted him on two counts of transporting people to engage in prostitution, for which he faces as many as 20 years in prison. But it seems likely that he will serve much less than that. The prosecutors are asking for about four to five years in prison, while Mr. Combs's attorneys are seeking less than two and a half. That the hotel tape is not by itself enough to convict Mr. Combs — of something — speaks to the system's failures. When that video was released, prosecutors were subject to the statute of limitations for domestic violence in California. The time to prosecute Mr. Combs's evident violence had long since run out. Mr. Combs's domestic abuse came up again and again in that trial — by the prosecutors, by the witnesses, and even by his own defense team. It came up so often, even in his lawyer's own closing argument — 'We own the domestic violence. I hope you guys know that.' — that it seemed to me practically a wink, a shrug, at Mr. Combs's documented abuse. How hard is it to own domestic violence with no charges? Mr. Combs himself offered up a grossly inadequate apology once the tape became known. 'I make no excuses,' he said, and then went on to make excuses, saying he'd 'hit rock bottom' in his life. What is rock bottom, I wonder, for someone with hundreds of millions of dollars, a staff tending his every whim, multiple houses, all the benefits and trappings of fame, talent and power? And in any case, is 'rock bottom' ever a justification for violence? There is also another more subtle, more sinister image that prosecutors tried and failed to get the jury to see: That video showed violence, yes, but, more importantly, it showed how a powerful man coerced and controlled a woman. But how were they to prove coercive control when text messages showed both Ms. Ventura and 'Jane,' who testified under a pseudonym, appearing to want to participate in the baby oil-fueled orgies called 'freak-offs,' which they even sometimes helped arrange? To the uninitiated, these women hardly sound coerced; they sound exactly like what Mr. Combs's lawyer, Teny Geragos, described: 'capable adults' making 'voluntary adult choices.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
