At a Glance
- Jeson Nelon Presilla Flores was deported to South America in December, halting a planned federal trial for a $100 million jewelry robbery.
- Prosecutors had expected a 15-year prison sentence on charges of interstate theft and foreign shipment.
- Flores was a lawful permanent resident who had been released on bail and was taken into ICE custody in September.
- Why it matters: The move leaves victims without a verdict and raises questions about coordination between immigration and criminal prosecutors.
The story of a $100 million jewelry heist that took place in 2022 has taken an unexpected turn. Federal immigration authorities allowed the suspect, Jeson Nelon Presilla Flores, to deport himself to South America in December, a decision that stunned prosecutors who had planned to try the case and send him to prison.
The $100 Million Heist
The robbery began on a July 2022 rest stop north of Los Angeles. Seven suspects stalked a Brinks armored truck that had just left an international jewelry show near San Francisco. They forced the driver to stop at the Flying J Travel Center in Lebec, California, and stole a haul of diamonds, emeralds, gold, rubies and designer watches.
- The stolen items were valued by the victims at $100 million.
- Brinks, the security company, assessed the loss at less than $10 million.
- A lawsuit filed by Brinks alleges the driver was asleep and the other was eating at the rest stop when the thieves entered.
The incident was described in the indictment as a conspiracy to commit theft from interstate and foreign shipment and theft from interstate and foreign shipment. Flores faced up to 15 years in federal prison if convicted.
Legal Charges and Prosecutorial Plans
Flores pleaded not guilty to the charges. Federal prosecutors had scheduled a trial and were preparing to seek a conviction and sentencing.
- Flores was a lawful permanent resident and had been released on bail.
- In September, he was taken into ICE custody, but prosecutors said they were unaware of an immigration detainer.
- The detention was seen as a violation of his criminal prosecution rights.
His attorney, John D. Robertson, filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, arguing that the detention and subsequent deportation should lead to a permanent drop of charges.
> “This was a violation of his criminal prosecution rights and warrants his case getting dismissed,” Robertson said in his motion.
Federal prosecutors opposed the motion, filing a response that emphasized they still hoped to bring Flores to trial.
> “We still want to keep the door open for criminal prosecution in the future,” the motion read.
They argued that the civil immigration process should run independently of pending criminal charges.
ICE Deportation and Unusual Proceedings
In late December, after Flores requested voluntary departure, ICE deported him. The process unfolded without the usual coordination between immigration and criminal prosecutors.
- At a December 16 immigration hearing, Flores opted for deportation to Chile.
- The judge denied his voluntary departure application but issued a final order of removal, sending him to Ecuador.
Former federal prosecutor Laurie Levenson described the case as “extremely unusual.”
> “It’s just beyond me how they would deport him without the prosecutors … being in on the conversation,” Levenson said.
She added that the situation was “the left hand not knowing what the right hand was doing.”
Reactions from Prosecutors and Victims
Prosecutors expressed frustration that the civil immigration process effectively ended the criminal case.
> “Prosecutors are supposed to allow the civil immigration process to play out independently while criminal charges are pending,” the motion opposing dismissal read.
Victims, represented by attorney Jerry Kroll, demanded answers.
> “When a defendant in a major federal theft case leaves the country before trial, victims are left without answers, without a verdict, and without closure,” Kroll told the Los Angeles Times.
Kroll highlighted that the lack of a trial leaves the jewelry companies without a resolution.
Implications and Unanswered Questions
The case raises several questions about the interface between immigration enforcement and criminal prosecution:
| Question | Current Status |
|---|---|
| How did ICE obtain Flores’ voluntary departure request? | ICE processed it in December without notifying prosecutors. |
| Why were prosecutors unaware of the immigration detainer? | Prosecutors claim they were not informed. |
| Will Flores face criminal charges if he returns to the U.S.? | Prosecutors keep the possibility open. |
The unusual sequence of events has prompted calls for clearer protocols. Until Flores returns, the $100 million heist remains unresolved, leaving victims, prosecutors, and the public in a state of uncertainty.
Key Takeaways
- Flores’ deportation halted a federal trial that could have resulted in a 15-year sentence.
- The $100 million robbery involved a complex interstate theft and foreign shipment conspiracy.
- Coordination gaps between ICE and prosecutors allowed the suspect to leave the country before trial.
- Victims are left without a verdict or closure, and the legal process remains incomplete.
The case underscores the need for tighter communication between immigration and criminal authorities in high-profile cases.
