Detained immigrant released in Erie, put under electronic monitoring |

Detained immigrant released in Erie, put under electronic monitoring

An immigrant whose case became a rallying cry for anti-deportation activists was released on Thursday in Erie on unsecured bond.

Alfredo Ramos-Gallegos, 40, of Painesville, Ohio, pleaded not guilty to a felony charge that he returned to the United States illegally about 14 years ago. If upheld, the charge would mark a second immigration offense for Ramos-Gallegos, who was deported to Mexico after a factory raid in Ohio in 2000.

He was taken into custody again on Feb. 8 after a routine traffic stop in Mentor, Ohio, then jailed in the Erie County Prison. His family and supporters have acknowledged he was in the United States illegally.

U.S. Magistrate Susan Paradise Baxter agreed to release Ramos-Gallegos on the condition that he stay at home under electronic monitoring while the case proceeds. The court has not set his next hearing date, said Thomas Patton, the assistant federal public defender representing Ramos-Gallegos.

Patton said he will ask David Hickton, the U.S. attorney for Western Pennsylvania, to reconsider whether to prosecute Ramos-Gallegos. President Obama ordered a review of immigration enforcement in the weeks since Ramos-Gallegos was arrested.

His “only crime was answering his pregnant, United States citizen wife’s pleas that he return to Painesville to help raise their children,” Patton said in a written statement.

Hickton’s office declined to comment on an active case. If convicted, Ramos-Gallegos could face a two-year prison sentence, a $250,000 fine or both.

Dozens of activists assembled on Thursday outside the Erie Federal Courthouse to support Ramos-Gallegos. A grassroots Latino group, HOLA Ohio, organized the effort and has called for an easing of federal immigration policies.

Adam Smeltz is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-380-5676 or [email protected].

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.