First trial of immigrant accused of trespassing on Texas border military zone ends in acquittal

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

---

A federal jury and judge acquitted a 21-year-old woman from Peru on Thursday of illegally entering a national defense area and military reservation after she crossed the Rio Grande from Mexico into Texas last month, in what lawyers say is the first trial of an immigrant since the Trump administration declared parts of the New Mexico and Texas border as a military zone.

Adely Vanessa De La Cruz-Alvarez was detained by soldiers and arrested by a Border Patrol agent on May 12 after they found her alone sitting next to the gate on a bollard wall near Tornillo, 40 miles east of El Paso.

“Hopefully, this sets the tone for the federal government,” said Veronica Teresa Lerma, one of her defense attorneys, adding, “so they know what the El Paso community will do with these charges.”

Earlier this year, the Trump administration designated 180 miles of the New Mexico border with Mexico and 63 miles in West Texas as a national defense area, overseen by U.S. Army commands based out of Fort Huachuca in Arizona and Fort Bliss in El Paso.

At the start of the trial, De La Cruz-Alvarez, who has been in immigration agents’ custody since her arrest, faced three misdemeanor charges: entering the country illegally, violating national defense property and trespassing onto a military base. She was found guilty of entering the country illegally and was already facing deportation as soon as she was arrested.

She was sentenced to time served plus one business day by U.S. Magistrate Judge Laura Enriquez. Even though she was acquitted of trespassing onto a military zone, De La Cruz-Alvarez will most likely get deported, said Shane Michael McMahon, her public defense attorney.

“She knew exactly what she was doing,” Phillip Douglas Countryman, the federal prosecutor, told the judge, asking for a 45-day jail sentence. Crossing the border illegally “should come with some sort of punishment.”

The verdict is the latest blow to the Trump administration, which pursued additional misdemeanor charges in addition to the usual misdemeanor charge of entering the U.S. improperly or the felony charge of reentering the country after being denied. Tacking on the trespassing charges, is the latest tactic the administration is trying in its attempt to deport and punish 1 million immigrants annually, including some who have entered the country legally.

Since late April, federal prosecutors in New Mexico and West Texas have filed misdemeanor criminal charges of violating national security regulations and entering restricted military property, in addition with entering the country without permission against immigrants accused of crossing the U.S.-Mexico border illegally. But judges quickly began dismissing the charges in both states.

Federal judges have said federal prosecutors have not shown evidence that immigrants broke into a national defense area knowingly and warning signs posted along the newly created national defense areas are not visible enough for people to know they’re on military land.

Typically, misdemeanor cases are presented directly to a judge, who determines whether prosecutors have presented evidence to charge a person with those crimes. In this case, the U.S. Department of Justice asked for a jury trial.

Countryman declined to comment. U.S. Attorney Justin R. Simmons for the Western District of Texas, said Thursday's verdict will not discourage the administration from continuing these prosecutions.

"While we respect the jury’s verdict, we will continue to aggressively prosecute National Defense Area violations and defend the interests of the United States here in the Western District of Texas," Simmons said in a statement. "At the end of the day, another illegal alien has been found guilty of illegally entering the country in violation of the improper entry statute and will be removed from the United States. That’s a win for America."

At the end of this trial, De La Cruz-Alvarez broke down in tears, hugged her lawyers and said, “Thank you.”

“The whole time I sat next to her, I saw a brave and strong person for taking on the Trump administration and its immigration policies,” said Lerma.

During the three-day trial that began Tuesday, Countryman and Debra P. Kanof, another prosecutor in the case, argued that De La Cruz-Alvarez knew that she entered the U.S. illegally and that a small sign near the gate was enough for her to know she was on U.S. Army property.

Enriquez disagreed.

On Wednesday, the judge dropped one of the three counts related to stepping into the national defense and restricted area, a misdemeanor that carries a potential sentence of up to a year in jail, if convicted.

“Simply put, the court does not believe there is evidence that would rise to the requirement of this statute,” Enriquez said.

During the trial, De La Cruz-Alvarez, a 5-foot-tall, 116-pound woman with long black hair, wore a long black dress and sat stoically, with a headset listening to interpreters translate the proceedings.

At the heart of this case was whether the warning sign was visible to De La Cruz-Alvarez and if the sign was even up when she crossed the border.

“The biggest problem with this zone is that it’s a trap,” McMahon said.

During testimony, McMahon held a replica sign that appeared to be 1 foot wide by 2 feet tall. He held up the sign, asking the Border Patrol agent who arrested De La Cruz-Alvarez if he could read it.

The agent said he had a hard time reading it until McMahon held the sign approximately 10 feet away from the agent. Edgar Contreras, a Border Patrol agent, testified he couldn’t remember whether the sign was up when he arrested De La Cruz-Alvarez.

The court proceedings were filled with tension.

During the jury selection process, Enriquez asked potential jurors if they could set aside any biases regarding immigration or sympathy for De La Cruz-Alvarez and come to a verdict based solely on the facts and evidence of the case.

A woman, who claimed during juror questioning that she had been briefly denied entry to the U.S. after visiting Canada even though she is a U.S. citizen, responded: “She’s an illegal, what rights does she have?” referring to De La Cruz-Alvarez. Another man questioned why De La Cruz-Alvarez was even getting a trial: “I think this is all a waste of time, she’s an illegal, alien, undocumented — whatever you want to call them.”

Neither of them was selected for the jury.

During testimony, the mere mention of Trump elicited annoyance from Kanof. When McMahon referred to the border barrier as Trump’s wall, Kanof asked the judge to keep the defense attorneys from bringing up politics.

During closing arguments, Kanof pointed out that when De La Cruz-Alvarez was arrested, she had makeup on, $500 in cash and had notified Border Patrol agents she was heading to Miami.

“As a woman, that tells me something, that she’s privileged,” Kanof told the jurors.

Lerma quickly interjected, asking the judge to instruct the jury to ignore Kanof’s description of De La Cruz-Alvarez because that wasn’t part of the evidence. Enriquez agreed, instructing the jury not to take into consideration Kanof’s comment.

---

Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O’Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer.

Get tickets.

TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.