FirstAlerts

Mason City Woman Sentenced to More Than 11 Years for Meth Conspiracy

Tina Smith, 46, was sentenced to 136 months in federal prison after pleading guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 24, 2026, 10:55 p.m. ET
Developing · checked 1h 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 25, 2026, 12:39 a.m. ET — checked 1h ago.

On August 24, 2026, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Iowa announced that Tina Smith, 46, of Mason City, was on August 18, 2026, to more than 11 years in federal prison. Smith had pleaded guilty on April 17, 2026, to conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance. Court records show that between March 6, 2024, and at least September 6, 2024, Smith and others were involved in an ongoing conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine in the Mason City area. Law enforcement used a confidential source to purchase methamphetamine from Smith on seven occasions. United States District Court Judge Leonard T. Strand Smith to 136 months' imprisonment, followed by a five-year term of supervised release. There is no parole in the federal system. Smith is in U.S. Marshal's custody pending transfer to a federal prison. The case was investigated by the Cerro Gordo County Sheriff's Department and the Iowa Division of Narcotics Enforcement, and prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Ron Timmons. The case file number is 25-3065.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 125 Aug 2026, 02:55current

    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.