By Yessenia Benavides
Management Analyst, Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority, &
Daniel Cleveland
Assistant Criminal District Attorney in Tarrant County
This year, my grandmother passed away at the young age of 96. She married at 18 and had 10 chil-dren. She never attended a public school in her life. As an adult, she taught herself to read using free prayer books she received as gifts. She knew hundreds of sayings, or dichos, which carried profound wisdom. An avid gardener and a master at life, she would often tell me, “If you don’t tend to your garden, it will soon be overtaken by weeds, and before you know it, your beautiful garden will become a wilderness.” In many ways, her wisdom mirrored that of many of the police chiefs I have had the privilege of meeting throughout my career. In both my grandmother and in these longtime police officers, their practical lived experiences combined with a dash of common sense often yield valuable insight.
How does all this relate to motor vehicle crimes?
In a recent meeting with a police chief from a major Texas city, a man with decades of law enforcement experience, he told me, “If you don’t attack the small crimes, it gives the chance for the big crimes to grow.” He was specifically referring to motor vehicle theft.
These offenses are not merely property crimes. Why? Criminals steal vehicles and then use those cars and trucks to commit additional offenses tied to cartel and terrorist organizations. They smuggle the vehicles across the U.S.–Mexico border, using them to deal arms, traffic drugs, traffic humans, and commit execut-ions. Juveniles are financially enticed to steal the cars for what they perceive as a low-risk crime.
In recent years, motor vehicle crime has become a significant issue not only for law enforcement but also for vehicle manufacturers, insurance companies, and other public health organizations worldwide.
Criminal syndicates are becoming increasingly sophisticated, utilizing drones and technological tools to alter how they conduct their crimes and how they operate. A key difference in this evolving landscape is that they have virtually unlimited budgets and no regulatory constraints to follow. Law enforcement, both police and prosecutors, must adopt bold and creative strategies to disrupt these highly organized criminal networks. One such help in the fight is the Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority (MVCPA).
The MVCPA
Established in 1991, the MVCPA is a resource for Texas law enforcement to combat motor vehicle crime. With annual losses exceeding $2.3 billion in Texas, the impact of these crimes is significant. To address it, MVCPA supports 31 law enforcement task forces composed of single and multiple jurisdictions, which include more than 330 grant-funded personnel. In addition to the task forces, MVCPA supports an additional 122 Texas law enforcement agencies with funding to detect and prevent catalytic converter theft. These grant-funded personnel consist of law enforcement investigators, analysts, administrative support, and most recently, prosecutors.
The newly created partnerships between task forces and district attorneys funded through grants is a new approach to addressing the complexities of motor vehicle crimes. With Texas having the second-highest number of auto thefts in the nation, this partnership reflects a growing commitment to decrease such criminal activities across our state. With enhanced resources and support from the state legislature, the MVCPA’s goal is to improve public safety and strengthen prosecution efforts.
Daniel Cleveland, an ACDA in Tarrant County, is one such MVCPA-supported prosecutor. Below, he offers additional insight into vehicle crime prosecution.
A prosecutor’s perspective
According to the Texas Department of Public Safety, there are approximately 26 million registered motor vehicles in Texas, which include trucks, buses, and motorcycles. In 2024, 97,246 of these vehicles were reported stolen. The Tarrant Regional Auto Crimes Task Force (TRACTF) is a law enforcement unit in North Texas dedicated to investigating and preventing motor vehicle-related crimes, such as vehicle theft, burglary, and fraud.
Some key functions of the TRACTF include:
• Investigations and enforcement. The task force focuses on large-dollar losses, multi-jurisdictional cases, and organized criminal rings. Investigators specialize in vehicle identification and work to uncover complex criminal schemes. They regularly conduct inspections of businesses, such as dealerships, salvage yards, and repair shops, to identify and investigate illicit activities.
• Inter-agency partnership. The task force is a regional collaboration between 13 local law enforcement agencies encompassing a seven-county area (Tarrant, Parker, Hood, Jack, Palo Pinto, Somervell, and Wise Counties). Also included in the partnership are a special field intelligence investigator from the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB) and an embedded investigator from the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (TxDMV).
• Prevention and education. The task force engages in community outreach initiatives, which feature vehicle identification number (VIN)-etching events, educational presentations, and the dissemination of public information through local media to prevent auto crimes.
TRACTF investigators routinely prepare cases for submission to the District Attorney’s Intake Unit. Line prosecutors are already burdened with increasing caseloads that include the usual major crimes that are time-, victim-, and resource-intensive. As a result, property crimes are sometimes, out of practicality and in the pursuit of judicial economy, relegated to the back of the line. With the belief that every case is entitled to the attention needed to pursue it to its just end, a solution was formulated. To facilitate the prosecution of cases brought by TRACTF, the Motor Vehicle Crime Prevention Authority (MVCPA) awarded a grant to the Tarrant County Criminal District Attorney’s Office, allocating some of those funds for the staffing of a dedicated prosecutor (me) to handle all TRACTF and participating agencies’ auto crime cases.
I am embedded with the TRACTF, regularly attending staff, intel, and tactical meetings; assisting in warrant preparation; petitioning the court on establishing bond amounts and conditions; and answering general questions involving charging language. It all leads to more effective prosecutions.
In grant year 2024 alone, the TRACTF filed 226 auto crime cases for prosecution. These cases go through the standard court docketing process but are not added to the case load of line prosecutors; instead, they are assigned to me, which signals the defense bar that a TRACTF case will receive specialized attention.
Specific evidence issues that commonly occur in auto crime cases are like any complex crime involving multiple crime scenes, combinations of persons, and special knowledge of the subject matter. However, motor vehicles add another dimension as they are fungible items. Vehicles can be stolen, re-titled (forgery), and resold to innocent parties (who then become second victims). Vehicles can be dismantled and sold as parts that might even end up in your own car! Additionally, they can also be used to commit other crimes. All these offenses create specialized problems in prosecution that require the acquisition of some specialized knowledge. How does a VIN flip work? What is a Nader sticker? What is an AUTEL device? How do I identify the rightful owner of a transmission found on a chop shop floor? How about a dashboard or engine? What about a trailer or skid steer? How do you get General Motors (GM) to provide data from the Bluetooth device in its trucks? These are just a few of the issues facing prosectors in the broad category of auto crime cases.
Dedicated units, such as the TRACTF and the dedicated prosecutor, overcome these challenges by meticulously gathering evidence, coordinating efforts between agencies and business entities, and using expert analysis to build stronger cases. Being a dedicated prosecutor assigned to a specialized unit, I see the effort and attention to detail needed to work these cases for actionable evidence. I also see the frustration these detectives face when they feel (rightly or not) that their efforts are not appreciated, as evidenced in how their cases are handled at docket.
My most recent and significant case in Tarrant County was an engaging in organized criminal activity (EOCA) offense involving the theft of multiple catalytic converters. This case was taken to jury trial and to the judge for punishment in November 2025, resulting in the conviction and 35-year prison sentence for a 27-year-old habitual offender. The case was notable as it was one of the first in Texas to be sentenced under the 2023 law (the Deputy Darren Almendarez Act) making the mere possession of a catalytic converter (with some limited exceptions) a state jail felony.
My colleague Colin Maloney from the White Collar Crimes Unit acted as the first chair, and he was assisted by Ryan Holland, one of the unit’s investigators, all under my supervision. Colin (in his third felony trial and fresh out of six months in grand jury) put on all evidence for the State. True to the nature of EOCA cases, this trial involved multiple crime scenes, various law enforcement agencies, GPS data, numerous cell phones with cellphone detail records (CDR), “Flock” photographs (images from license plate readers with real-time alerts and vehicle details from cameras tied into a database that install anywhere, no wiring required) and testimony from eight victims and multiple detectives. The evidence revealed that the defendant, in cooperation with his driver also acting as his lookout, rented a vehicle from a “peer to peer” rental agency and failed to return the vehicle as promised. The owner reported the vehicle as stolen and disclosed it was equipped with a GPS system.
Around the same time, there were multiple reports of catalytic converters stolen in the area. Thanks to timely detective work by the Grapevine Police Department, which “quarterbacked” multiple law enforcement agencies, officers used the GPS to locate the stolen rental vehicle and caught the defendants in the act. This led to a pursuit, which resulted in their capture and the recovery of important items, including a Sawzall and floor jack (tools associated with their activities), stolen catalytic converters, and most importantly, two cell phones. By analyzing data from the GPS and the CDR from the cell phones, detectives established that the two perpetrators were present at each of the crime scenes at the approximate time and date of the thefts. Moreover, the CDR revealed numerous text conversations, both before and after the offenses, in which they negotiated the sale price of the stolen catalytic converters to their “fence.” With this new information, detectives identified this third party to the combination to make the EOCA case.
Another important function a dedicated prosecutor can perform is to engage with multiple jurisdictions and law enforcement agencies. In one instance, I consulted with federal authorities about a case involving transnational actors. I helped prosecute a Cuban organized crime ring specializing in high-end trucks and SUVs based in southwest Houston, which resulted in the federal indictment of multiple defendants involved in thefts at the Dallas–Fort Worth Airport. Collaborating with the local police departments and Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), we uncovered a criminal conspiracy involving thefts across multiple jurisdictions, with vehicles predominantly stolen from major metropolitan airports and surrounding areas, including Las Vegas, Phoenix, Salt Lake City, Denver, Fort Lauderdale, Dallas–Fort Worth, and Houston.
In addition, I have petitioned courts to declare the bonds insufficient on several prolific defendants, raising the bond, and adding bond conditions (such as GPS) to assure they are deterred from reoffending while on bond.
I can provide real time information from Adult Probation to detectives on the whereabouts of a defendant on bond with an ankle monitor (GPS), facilitating the safe entry into a residence for warranted searches.
As education is a part of the TRACTF mandate, on an ad hoc basis, I can also educate other prosecutors on crimes involving motor vehicles and train auto theft crime detectives on warrant requirements under the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in Morton.[1]
Conclusion
Property rights are fundamental to security and confidence in the legal and economic systems. Addressing property crimes demonstrates the significance of these rights and provides a sense of security among property owners, thereby maintaining social order and building trust in our neighbors and communities. Individuals must feel safe acquiring property without the fear of losing it through theft and the additional fear that your property might be used in the furtherance of a crime. Through the years, we’ve come to learn that auto crimes are sometimes not a single isolated incident, but rather a critical entry point into a much larger web of criminal networks that create a significant risk to public safety and economic stability.
Beyond the usual arguments for deterrence, retribution, and punishment, it can most simply be said that “theft is a tax on the honest.” I believe that as prosecutors, our job is to seek justice and to prevent this “tax” from increasing. With a dedicated prosecutor to assist in proper enforcement and just sentencing in the courts, the goal of minimizing these losses is within our reach.
[1] United States v. Morton, 984 F.3d 421 (5th Cir. 2021) (ruling that the good-faith exception to the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule did not apply when the officers’ reliance on defective warrants to search a defendant’s cell phone had been objectively unreasonable).