FirstAlerts

Dominican Man Pleads Guilty to Fraudulently Obtaining U.S. Citizenship

A Dominican national admitted in federal court to using a stolen identity to obtain U.S. citizenship after a prior deportation.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 28, 2026, 8:06 p.m. ET
A native of the Dominican Republic guilty on August 25, 2026, to fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey. The office announced the plea on August 28, 2026. The defendant, identified in court records as Carlos Gonzalez-Rodriguez, also known as Braulio Cepeda-Rodriguez, 41, entered the plea before District Court Judge Karen M. Williams in Camden federal court. According to statements made in court and documents filed in the case, Gonzalez-Rodriguez was previously deported after being convicted of attempted armed robbery. He re-entered the United States using another person's identity and subsequently applied for and obtained citizenship using that identity, lying about his name, date of birth, history, and deportation history. The charge carries a maximum penalty of ten years in prison, a $250,000 fine, and three years of supervised release. The court will also revoke his citizenship at sentencing, which is scheduled for February 1, 2027. U.S. Attorney Robert Frazer credited special agents of Homeland Security Investigations, led by Special Agent in Charge Michael McCarthy, with the investigation. The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Joseph McFarlane. Defense counsel are Assistant Federal Public Defenders Jenny Hurwitz and Areeb Salim.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 129 Aug 2026, 00:06current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble β€” all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources β€” accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements β€” and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld β€” a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them β€” and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.