JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES FEDERAL ELECTION CRIME CHARGES AGAINST 16 INDIVIDUALS ACROSS THE COUNTRY

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The United States Department of Justice announced on October 12, 2026, that 16 individuals have been charged in federal election-related cases involving allegations of unlawful voting, fraudulent voter registration, duplicate voting, and offenses connected to citizenship status. The prosecutions span multiple federal judicial districts and involve accusations ranging from attempting to submit a deceased person’s absentee ballot to casting ballots without United States citizenship and voting in more than one state during the same federal election.

The cases involve individuals of different nationalities and immigration statuses, including lawful permanent residents, a French national identified by federal authorities as unlawfully present in the United States, and a naturalized American citizen accused of obtaining citizenship unlawfully. One prosecution concerns an individual accused of voting twice in the 2024 general election, while another involves an alleged attempt to submit a ballot belonging to a deceased spouse. The Department’s announcement identifies separate proceedings brought by federal prosecutors rather than a single nationwide criminal conspiracy.

The October 12 announcement includes cases arising from elections conducted in 2022 and 2024, along with allegations involving voter registration records dating back more than two decades. Several defendants face accusations concerning repeated participation in elections despite not possessing United States citizenship. Others are accused of making false citizenship declarations during registration or engaging in conduct that allegedly violated federal election laws.

Federal law generally restricts voting in elections for President, Vice President, the United States Senate, and the House of Representatives to eligible United States citizens. Under 18 U.S.C. § 611, noncitizens are generally prohibited from voting in federal elections, subject to specific statutory exceptions. Lawful permanent resident status permits an individual to live and work in the United States but does not independently confer eligibility to vote in federal elections.

Federal statutes also establish criminal penalties for knowingly providing false citizenship information in certain circumstances, fraudulently registering or voting, and unlawfully procuring naturalization. The precise charges, required elements of proof, and potential penalties vary depending on the conduct alleged and the statutes applied.

The Justice Department’s announcement identifies criminal complaints, indictments, and informations filed against the individuals involved. These documents initiate or support criminal proceedings, but their allegations are not equivalent to findings of guilt. Each defendant remains presumed innocent unless prosecutors establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

In the District of New Mexico, federal prosecutors obtained an indictment against Patrick Perea, 62, charging him with one count of fraudulent voting. According to the Justice Department, Perea attempted to submit the absentee ballot of his deceased wife during the November 2024 general election.

The alleged conduct involved presenting the ballot to the Bureau of Elections within the Bernalillo County Clerk’s Office in Albuquerque. The prosecution concerns an attempt to use a ballot associated with a person who was no longer legally capable of casting a vote. Such allegations raise questions about the authentication of absentee ballots, procedures used to identify deceased voters, and the legal consequences of knowingly attempting to cast a ballot in another person’s name.

The indictment establishes that a federal grand jury found sufficient grounds for the charge to proceed. It does not establish that the alleged attempt succeeded, that the ballot was counted, or that Perea has been convicted. The Department’s announcement does not identify an election outcome affected by the alleged conduct.

In the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, federal prosecutors charged four foreign nationals with voting unlawfully in the 2024 election. The defendants include Hacina Saadi, 48, a French national whom the Department identifies as unlawfully present in the United States; Jamil Ahmad, 50, a Pakistani national and lawful permanent resident; Nighat Jamil, 47, also a Pakistani national and lawful permanent resident; and Paulo Silva, 54, a Portuguese national and lawful permanent resident.

All four defendants were charged by information with voting by an alien. A criminal information is a formal charging document filed by prosecutors rather than returned by a grand jury. In federal felony cases, prosecution by information generally requires the defendant to waive indictment, while misdemeanor charges may proceed under different procedural requirements.

The Pennsylvania prosecutions concern the fundamental legal requirement that participation in federal elections ordinarily requires United States citizenship. Three of the defendants are identified as lawful permanent residents, a status that does not independently confer eligibility to vote in a federal election.

The October 12 release does not specify the candidates selected on the ballots, whether the defendants were connected to one another, or the circumstances in which their voter registrations were processed. The announced charges therefore concern individual allegations rather than an established coordinated voting operation.

Two additional prosecutions were announced in the Southern District of Alabama. Silvia Delgado Phelps, 78, a Peruvian national and lawful permanent resident, was charged by criminal complaint with voting unlawfully as a noncitizen. Prosecutors allege that Phelps participated in multiple elections in Baldwin County, Alabama, despite lacking United States citizenship.

The second Alabama defendant, Staciann Pollion Davis, 42, is a Jamaican national and lawful permanent resident. Davis was charged by criminal complaint with voting unlawfully in the November 2024 general election in Clarke County, Alabama.

These cases concern allegations involving voter participation by individuals who possessed lawful immigration status but were not United States citizens. Lawful permanent residents may qualify for various civic and legal protections, yet eligibility to participate in federal elections remains governed by citizenship requirements and applicable election law.

A separate Alabama prosecution concerns alleged duplicate voting across state boundaries. In the Northern District of Alabama, Forrest Scott Woody, 68, of Hendersonville, North Carolina, was charged with illegally voting more than once in the November 2024 general election.

According to the indictment, Woody voted in Henderson County, North Carolina, and subsequently cast another ballot in Calhoun County, Alabama, during the same election. The allegations differ from the noncitizen voting cases because they concern participation in the same election in two jurisdictions.

Voting in more than one state during the same federal election is prohibited under federal law, subject to the governing statutory requirements. The allegations against Woody illustrate the importance of identifying duplicate participation when an individual has voter registration records or voting activity associated with multiple jurisdictions.

States administer their own voter registration systems, maintain election records, and establish procedures for determining eligibility. Interstate voter information-sharing arrangements and election record reviews can help identify potential duplicate registrations or voting activity, although a registration appearing in more than one jurisdiction does not independently establish that a person cast multiple ballots.

In the Western District of Missouri, federal prosecutors brought two illegal voting counts against Andre’s Garcia, 64, a Cuban national and lawful permanent resident. The charges concern federal elections conducted in November 2022 and November 2024.

According to the Justice Department, Garcia allegedly represented himself as a United States citizen when registering to vote in 2004 and again in 2013, despite knowing that he lacked citizenship. Prosecutors also allege that Garcia participated in at least 15 elections over approximately 20 years, including at least 13 federal elections.

The Missouri allegations involve a substantially longer period of reported voter participation than several of the other cases. The Department identifies two charged federal election violations while describing a broader history of alleged voting activity. That difference is legally significant because conduct described in a charging announcement is not necessarily the subject of a separate criminal count for every election.

The case also raises questions concerning the declarations made during voter registration and the circumstances under which an individual’s eligibility was accepted. False citizenship declarations can carry criminal consequences when the applicable legal elements are established, particularly when the statements are knowingly made to obtain a benefit or exercise a right reserved to citizens.

Although the Department describes Garcia as having known he was not a citizen, that assertion remains part of the prosecution’s account until established in court. His lawful permanent resident status does not itself establish fraudulent intent, and the government bears the burden of proving the relevant criminal allegations.

In Idaho, Stanley Walton, 82, a Canadian national and lawful permanent resident, was charged with unlawfully voting in the 2022 general election. Federal prosecutors allege that Walton cast a ballot despite not being a United States citizen.

The Idaho announcement identifies the defendant’s nationality, age, immigration status, and election involved. It does not provide a detailed account of his registration history or explain the circumstances surrounding the alleged ballot. Those questions may become relevant as the prosecution proceeds, depending on the evidence and specific legal requirements at issue.

A separate case in the District of New Jersey involves both alleged unlawful voting and the naturalization process. Lizabeth Almonte Rosa, 24, a naturalized United States citizen originally from the Dominican Republic, was charged by criminal complaint with voting by an alien in a federal election and unlawfully procuring citizenship.

According to the Justice Department, documents filed in the case and statements made in court indicate that Rosa was not a United States citizen when she was registered to vote. The charge involving unlawful procurement of citizenship introduces an additional legal issue beyond the alleged voting violation.

Naturalization is the legal process through which an eligible foreign national becomes a United States citizen. Federal law establishes requirements involving eligibility, application procedures, examinations, and representations made to immigration authorities. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1425, unlawful procurement of naturalization or citizenship can constitute a federal offense when the statutory elements are satisfied.

An accusation involving unlawful procurement does not automatically establish that a person’s citizenship has been revoked. Criminal liability, the legal consequences of a conviction, and any resulting changes to citizenship status must be determined through the applicable legal process.

The New Jersey case demonstrates how allegations involving election eligibility can intersect with immigration and naturalization law. Prosecutors must establish the elements of the charged offenses separately rather than relying solely on an allegation that the defendant previously registered to vote while not possessing citizenship.

In the Southern District of Ohio, federal authorities charged Cary Ann Patterson, 59, a British national and lawful permanent resident, with illegally voting in a federal election as a noncitizen.

The criminal complaint alleges that Patterson voted in November 2024. According to the Department, the Gallia County Board of Elections received a voter registration card for Patterson in 2005 in which the citizenship question was answered affirmatively.

The registration form asked whether the applicant was a United States citizen, and the response recorded on the document was yes. Election records cited in the case also indicate that Patterson allegedly participated in at least 10 elections while not possessing United States citizenship.

The case underscores the legal importance of information supplied on voter registration forms. Citizenship declarations can determine whether an applicant satisfies a foundational eligibility requirement, and knowingly providing false information may expose an individual to criminal prosecution when the applicable conditions are met.

The Northern District of Ohio announced two additional cases involving lawful permanent residents accused of participating unlawfully in federal elections.

Arshed Zuberi, 69, a Pakistani national, was charged by criminal complaint with voting in a federal election despite not being a United States citizen. The Justice Department alleges that Zuberi registered to vote in September 2015 and again in August 2016.

According to the announcement, the registration documents contain a declaration of United States citizenship accompanied by Zuberi’s signature. Records obtained from the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections indicate that he voted in at least six elections.

The second Northern District of Ohio defendant, Eliza M. Moss, 63, is a Filipino national and lawful permanent resident. She was charged by criminal complaint with unlawfully voting in a federal election as a noncitizen.

The Department states that Moss registered to vote in September 2004 and February 2023. Her registration forms reportedly contained a signed declaration of United States citizenship, and election records indicate that she allegedly participated in several primary and general elections.

The complaint also includes an important account concerning the registration process. According to the Justice Department, Moss told investigators that the person who assisted her with completing the registration form had informed her that she could vote despite not being a United States citizen.

That statement may be relevant to examining the circumstances surrounding her registration and her understanding of eligibility requirements. It does not independently establish a legal defense or determine the outcome of the prosecution. The significance of the information would depend on the offense charged, the applicable mental-state requirements, and the evidence presented.

The Ohio cases also demonstrate that voter registration records can become important documentary evidence in federal investigations. Applications, citizenship declarations, registration dates, and participation histories may help prosecutors establish timelines and identify the specific conduct under examination.

In the District of Hawaii, prosecutors charged Dawid Nalepa, 45, a Polish national, by information with unlawfully voting as a noncitizen.

According to the Justice Department, Nalepa entered the United States around 2020 through the Visa Waiver Program, remained beyond the permitted period, and subsequently applied for lawful permanent resident status. Prosecutors allege that he cast a ballot in the November 2024 general election despite not possessing United States citizenship.

The Department further states that Nalepa understood he was not a citizen when he allegedly voted. The prosecution therefore involves both his citizenship status at the time of the election and the government’s allegation concerning his knowledge of that status.

The federal announcement contains a spelling inconsistency, referring to him as Nalepa in the charging description and Nepela in the accompanying account of his immigration history. The defendant is identified here as Dawid Nalepa, consistent with the name used in the Department’s charging description.

In the Western District of Kentucky, Sandra Madeline Watson, 59, a Canadian national and lawful permanent resident, was charged with illegally voting as a noncitizen in a federal election.

According to the Justice Department, Watson allegedly voted in an election conducted to select a candidate for President, Vice President, the United States Senate, or the House of Representatives while knowing she was not a United States citizen.

The announcement does not identify the exact election date or provide the same level of registration history described in several other prosecutions. The charge nevertheless concerns the federal citizenship requirement applicable to elections for national office.

Together, the 16 cases illustrate several distinct categories of alleged election misconduct. Most involve foreign nationals accused of voting without citizenship. Others concern an alleged deceased-person ballot submission, duplicate voting across state lines, and a prosecution involving the allegedly unlawful procurement of citizenship.

These legal categories should not be treated as interchangeable. Unlawful voting by a noncitizen, submitting another person’s ballot, voting more than once, making a false registration declaration, and obtaining naturalization unlawfully can involve different statutes, evidentiary requirements, and potential penalties.

Federal elections are administered through a decentralized system in which state and local authorities maintain voter registration records, process ballots, establish verification procedures, and conduct elections under applicable law. Federal authorities may investigate and prosecute violations of statutes protecting federal election processes, including offenses involving fraudulent ballots, prohibited voting, and false statements.

Under 52 U.S.C. § 10307, federal law addresses certain forms of fraudulent voting conduct and interference with voting rights. Other statutes, including 18 U.S.C. §§ 611, 1015, and 1425, address specific unlawful conduct involving noncitizen voting, citizenship representations, and naturalization. Application of these provisions depends on the facts of each case and the particular statutory elements alleged.

The relationship between election administration and federal prosecution is especially important because an irregular registration record does not automatically establish a criminal offense. Investigators may need to determine whether a ballot was actually submitted, whether it was accepted or counted, what an applicant represented, and whether the defendant possessed the knowledge or intent required by law.

The October 12 announcement does not identify a coordinated national operation involving all 16 defendants. The cases arise from multiple federal judicial districts and concern conduct alleged to have occurred at different times and under different circumstances.

The Department also does not provide a comprehensive statistical assessment of unlawful voting across the United States. The 16 prosecutions represent identified cases announced by federal authorities, not a measure of the national prevalence of election crimes.

Nor does the announcement establish that any particular election result was changed by the alleged conduct. Establishing whether an election outcome was affected would require separate evidence concerning the number of ballots involved, the relevant contests, and the certified vote totals.

The legal significance of these prosecutions rests on the alleged violations themselves. Federal voting eligibility requirements and prohibitions against fraudulent participation apply independently of whether an individual ballot could alter the outcome of a contest.

The allegations involving incorrect citizenship declarations raise additional questions about registration procedures and the responsibility of applicants to provide accurate information. Where registration assistance is involved, investigators may also examine the circumstances under which information was entered and whether the person applying understood the declarations being made.

In prosecutions involving alleged duplicate voting, election investigators may examine records from more than one jurisdiction. Such cases require establishing that the same person engaged in prohibited voting conduct, rather than relying solely on the existence of multiple registration records.

The prosecution involving a deceased person’s absentee ballot addresses another area of election administration: ensuring that ballots are submitted by individuals legally authorized to cast them. Absentee voting procedures must accommodate eligible voters while maintaining safeguards against unauthorized ballot submissions.

The Justice Department’s announcement presents an enforcement action involving individuals accused of violating those requirements. The cases will proceed according to their respective judicial processes, with the government responsible for proving each defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The broader significance of the announcement is that federal election laws address multiple forms of alleged misconduct through separate criminal provisions. The cases demonstrate how voter registration records, ballot histories, citizenship documentation, and investigative findings can become central to federal prosecutions.

For election administrators, accurate records and appropriate eligibility procedures remain essential components of lawful election administration. For federal prosecutors, the responsibility is to establish alleged violations through evidence that satisfies the applicable criminal standards. For defendants, constitutional protections and the presumption of innocence remain fully applicable.

The Department’s October 12 announcement identifies 16 individuals facing federal criminal accusations involving election-related conduct across multiple federal judicial districts. It establishes the existence of the announced charges and outlines the allegations, but the final determination of criminal responsibility belongs to the courts.

The integrity of federal elections depends on eligible participation, accurate administration, enforcement of applicable law, and fair judicial proceedings. These prosecutions will be judged through that legal framework, with the evidence and outcomes of each individual case determining whether the government’s allegations are proven.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

🔥 NOW AVAILABLE! 🔥

‎👉 Eclipsera – Apple Music

---

---

---

---

---