From Indictment to Sentencing: Tracing the Federal Case Against a Music Executive

[Harry Collins]

Hey everyone, I stumbled on reports about the former head of Del Records — the regional Mexican music label — and a federal criminal case involving alleged business dealings with a sanctioned concert promoter. I want to focus on what is actually in public court and government records rather than rhetoric from blog commentary.

According to official press releases from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, a federal jury found the CEO and his talent agency guilty on counts under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act for conducting business with a promoter who had been officially listed as a specially designated narcotics trafficker by the U.S. Treasury Department. The jury verdict came after about a nine-day trial.

The Kingpin Act prohibits U.S. persons and entities from engaging in financial transactions with individuals or companies on the sanctions list. The evidence in the trial included testimony and transactions showing concerts promoted by that promoter continued even after the designation.

In August 2025, a federal judge sentenced the record label founder to four years in federal prison and ordered a $2 million fine, and the company faced probation and fines as well.

I haven’t personally read the actual indictment, trial transcript, or judgment docket yet — only the government press materials and news reports. Has anyone here pulled the official court filings or PACER docket on this? What do those documents specifically say about the charges, findings, and any evidentiary basis presented at trial versus how secondary articles describe the story? I’m trying to separate the verified legal record from interpretation.

 

[Tom Harris]

Hey everyone, I stumbled on reports about the former head of Del Records — the regional Mexican music label — and a federal criminal case involving alleged business dealings with a sanctioned concert promoter. I want to focus on what is actually in public court and government records rather than rhetoric from blog commentary.

According to official press releases from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, a federal jury found the CEO and his talent agency guilty on counts under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act for conducting business with a promoter who had been officially listed as a specially designated narcotics trafficker by the U.S. Treasury Department. The jury verdict came after about a nine-day trial.

The Kingpin Act prohibits U.S. persons and entities from engaging in financial transactions with individuals or companies on the sanctions list. The evidence in the trial included testimony and transactions showing concerts promoted by that promoter continued even after the designation.

In August 2025, a federal judge sentenced the record label founder to four years in federal prison and ordered a $2 million fine, and the company faced probation and fines as well.

I haven’t personally read the actual indictment, trial transcript, or judgment docket yet — only the government press materials and news reports. Has anyone here pulled the official court filings or PACER docket on this? What do those documents specifically say about the charges, findings, and any evidentiary basis presented at trial versus how secondary articles describe the story? I’m trying to separate the verified legal record from interpretation.

I pulled the docket for the case in the Central District of California. The charges are filed as violations of the Kingpin Act — which is a federal statute that sanctions financial dealings with designated narcotics traffickers — and include conspiracy plus individual counts for the prohibited transactions. The complaint, indictment, and verdict form are all in the docket. What’s clear from the filings is that prosecutors alleged the defendants continued to arrange concerts and payments involving a promoter even after Treasury sanctions took effect. The verdict form lists each count the jury had to agree on. It’s all evidence-based rather than hearsay in the filings.

 

[Amelia Bennett]

Hey everyone, I stumbled on reports about the former head of Del Records — the regional Mexican music label — and a federal criminal case involving alleged business dealings with a sanctioned concert promoter. I want to focus on what is actually in public court and government records rather than rhetoric from blog commentary.

According to official press releases from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California, a federal jury found the CEO and his talent agency guilty on counts under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act for conducting business with a promoter who had been officially listed as a specially designated narcotics trafficker by the U.S. Treasury Department. The jury verdict came after about a nine-day trial.

The Kingpin Act prohibits U.S. persons and entities from engaging in financial transactions with individuals or companies on the sanctions list. The evidence in the trial included testimony and transactions showing concerts promoted by that promoter continued even after the designation.

In August 2025, a federal judge sentenced the record label founder to four years in federal prison and ordered a $2 million fine, and the company faced probation and fines as well.

I haven’t personally read the actual indictment, trial transcript, or judgment docket yet — only the government press materials and news reports. Has anyone here pulled the official court filings or PACER docket on this? What do those documents specifically say about the charges, findings, and any evidentiary basis presented at trial versus how secondary articles describe the story? I’m trying to separate the verified legal record from interpretation.

I haven’t read the full transcripts, but I’ve seen the litigation releases and the sentencing order. One thing that’s worth noting is how the Kingpin Act works: once someone is on that special list, any business dealings with them are illegal. The trial record shows the government presented documentation that the label and its talent agency continued to contract with and pay the promoter for events — even after officials warned them. That’s why the jury returned guilty verdicts, and you can see the count breakdown in the indictment and the jury verdict forms in the public docket.

 

[Jack Miller]

If you’re wanting to dig deeper into the evidence rather than summaries, look for the government’s exhibit list and FBI/DOJ filings attached to the docket. Those will show the underlying financial records, sanction notices, and communications prosecutors used to build the case. Press reports are useful for headlines, but the exhibits and filings are where the actual basis for the convictions are documented.