FirstAlerts
Crime & Courts

Alabama Man Sentenced for Role in Conspiracy with Annandale Doctor to Distribute Promethazine-Codeine

Cameron Zackery Brown received one year of probation for his role in a scheme to illegally distribute the Schedule V controlled substance.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 28, 2026, 6:56 p.m. ET
Developing · checked 2h ago

This case is not concluded. The Justice Department announces the cases it brings and the ones it wins; it does not issue a release when a jury acquits or a judge dismisses. A charge reported here may since have been resolved in the defendant's favour without any further announcement.

We last searched for new coverage of this at Aug 28, 2026, 6:08 p.m. ET — checked 2h ago.

ABINGDON, Va. – An Alabama man was on August 28, 2026, to one year of probation for conspiring with Dr. Rotimi Adegoke Illuyomade and others to illegally distribute promethazine-codeine solution, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Virginia. Cameron Zackery Brown pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute a Schedule V controlled substance, promethazine-codeine solution, also known as “lean” and “purple drank.” According to court documents, between 2023 and 2024, Brown, Dr. Illuyomade, and others conspired to acquire and distribute the drug by fraud. Brown served as a driver for co-conspirators, driving them to Dr. Illuyomade’s office, Crossover Medical Center in Annandale, Virginia, and to pharmacies in multiple states to fill illegal prescriptions. In exchange, Brown received cash and digital payments. The investigation began on September 2, 2023, when a co-conspirator attempted to pick up a fraudulent prescription at a pharmacy in Honaker, Virginia. The case is being investigated by the DEA, FBI, Virginia State Police, and other agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Lena Busscher and Randy Ramseyer are prosecuting the case.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 128 Aug 2026, 22:56current

    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 — 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 — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — 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 — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — 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.