![]() National Drug Intelligence Center |
The number of drug-related treatment admissions to publicly funded facilities in Harris County declined from 2006 through 2008. According to Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) data, total drug-related treatment admissions to publicly funded facilities declined 13 percent during this period, with declines reported in all drug categories. Adult drug-related treatment admissions were the highest for crack cocaine, followed by marijuana/hashish and powder cocaine, while youth admissions were primarily for marijuana/hashish, followed by powder cocaine during the 3-year period. Treatment admissions in Harris County reflected the trends occurring in the HIDTA region as a whole. (See Table 6.)
Table 6. Drug-Related Treatment Admissions to Publicly Funded Facilities in the Houston HIDTA Region, 2006-2008
County | Powder Cocaine | Crack Cocaine | Heroin | Marijuana/Hashish | Amphetamines | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | ||
Aransas | Adult | * | * | * | * | * | * | 28 | 21 | 32 | 0 | * | * | * | * | * |
Youth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 28 | 36 | 57 | * | * | 0 | |
Brooks | Adult | 14 | 26 | 15 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 25 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Youth | * | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Fort Bend | Adult | 70 | 88 | 57 | 70 | 59 | 49 | * | * | * | 140 | 171 | 170 | * | 20 | * |
Youth | * | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 14 | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Galveston | Adult | 115 | 104 | 85 | 273 | 301 | 247 | 30 | 19 | 15 | 133 | 151 | 147 | 32 | 31 | 26 |
Youth | * | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 96 | 141 | 114 | * | * | * | |
Hardin | Adult | 18 | * | * | 29 | 32 | 14 | * | 0 | * | 10 | 17 | * | 15 | 21 | 11 |
Youth | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | 11 | * | * | * | 0 | |
Harris | Adult | 924 | 821 | 831 | 1,798 | 1,608 | 1,607 | 420 | 169 | 186 | 1,280 | 1,152 | 1,271 | 264 | 199 | 162 |
Youth | 42 | 48 | 31 | 10 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 888 | 802 | 832 | * | * | * | |
Jefferson | Adult | 67 | 89 | 44 | 414 | 362 | 308 | 16 | 11 | * | 139 | 142 | 105 | 54 | 60 | 25 |
Youth | * | * | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 47 | 38 | 57 | * | 0 | * | |
Jim Wells | Adult | 58 | 41 | 63 | 28 | 20 | 22 | 12 | * | 20 | 46 | 37 | 45 | * | * | * |
Youth | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Kenedy | Adult | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Youth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Kleberg | Adult | 11 | * | 10 | 14 | * | * | * | * | 14 | * | * | * | 0 | * | * |
Youth | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Liberty | Adult | 11 | * | 10 | 16 | 20 | 21 | 0 | * | * | 13 | 11 | 29 | 17 | 32 | 16 |
Youth | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | * | 0 | * | 0 | |
Nueces | Adult | 324 | 282 | 247 | 360 | 277 | 261 | 443 | 342 | 388 | 256 | 312 | 364 | 75 | 104 | 91 |
Youth | 10 | 18 | * | * | * | * | * | * | 0 | 163 | 180 | 172 | * | * | 0 | |
Orange | Adult | * | 27 | 17 | 81 | 77 | 55 | * | * | * | 36 | 34 | 39 | 51 | 33 | 18 |
Youth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | * | 19 | * | 0 | 0 | |
Refugio | Adult | * | 0 | * | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | * | 0 | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Youth | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | * | 0 | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
San Patricio | Adult | 36 | 21 | 30 | 47 | 28 | 20 | 41 | 26 | 27 | 14 | 19 | 27 | * | 18 | 12 |
Youth | * | * | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 29 | * | 0 | * | 0 | |
Victoria | Adult | 11 | * | 14 | 17 | 17 | 34 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 10 | * |
Youth | * | * | * | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 68 | 41 | 56 | * | 0 | 0 | |
Houston HIDTA** | Adult | 1,659 | 1,499 | 1,423 | 3,147 | 2,801 | 2,638 | 990 | 588 | 682 | 2,082 | 2,071 | 2,214 | 508 | 528 | 361 |
Youth | 52 | 66 | 31 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1,326 | 1,292 | 1,331 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Source: Texas Department of State Health Services.
*
As a result of confidentiality requirements in
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, treatment admissions with
a frequency of less than 10 are not reported.
**
Houston HIDTA region totals have omitted admissions
in any category with a frequency less than 10; therefore, actual totals are slightly
higher than those represented.
Houston is a significant money laundering center because of its proximity to Mexico as well as its role as a major drug distribution area and global financial center. Traffickers launder drug funds in Houston primarily by consolidating illicit proceeds generated in the city and transporting them in bulk to Mexico; they also transport bulk cash to Canada, but to a lesser extent. (See text box.) According to NDTS data, 12 of the 17 responding agencies from Harris County report that the use of bulk cash movement is high in their jurisdictions. Traffickers also use the area as a consolidation point for bulk currency shipments from other regions of the country. Traffickers transport smaller bulk cash shipments to Houston for consolidation before the shipments are transported to the Southwest Border area, where they are smuggled into Mexico for eventual repatriation. According to NDIC's National Drug Threat Assessment 2009 Mexican and Colombian DTOs generate, remove, and launder between $18 billion and $39 billion in wholesale drug proceeds annually, a large portion of which is believed to be bulk-smuggled out of the United States at the Southwest Border.8 A large percentage of these proceeds quite likely transit the Houston metropolitan area en route to South Texas and Mexico.
Examples of Laundering Drug Proceeds in Houston Traffickers in Houston use various money laundering techniques to conceal the source of drug proceeds. Examples of these techniques include the following: Members of the Los Hermanos de Pistoleros (HPL) prison gang were arrested in May 2008 for laundering millions of dollars in drug proceeds generated by the sale of cocaine in Houston; they had been structuring and depositing the cash into personal bank accounts in Laredo since July 2007. These members had been depositing cocaine proceeds into bank accounts and withdrawing the money to purchase real estate, vehicles, airline tickets, and numerous services and personal items, including jewelry and designer items. Members of a marijuana smuggling operation were sentenced in January 2009 for laundering drug money and trafficking marijuana. The organization had smuggled marijuana from Mexico to as far away as Massachusetts and smuggled the drug proceeds back to various locations, including Houston. Once the bulk cash reached these locations, it was smuggled to the Rio Grande Valley and eventually into Mexico. A Canadian citizen of Vietnamese descent was sentenced in October 2008 for her role in an international money laundering scheme in which she laundered proceeds from the sale of MDMA. Sometimes the individual and her associates transported bulk cash from Houston to Canada, while at other times they purchased cashier's checks, which they mailed to Canada hidden in catalogs and magazines. As her operation grew, she began to launder the proceeds through MSBs and sent the wire transfers to Vietnam and then to Canada. Source: U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas. |
Traffickers also engage in other money laundering activities in Houston, including commingling illicit proceeds with legitimate business funds generated at cash-intensive businesses, using MSBs, exploiting financial institutions (banks), using prepaid cards, and investing in real estate. (See text box; see Figure 6.) Traffickers often use several methods of money laundering concurrently in an attempt to mask illicit proceeds.
Figure 6. Money Laundering Techniques Used by Wholesale-Level Traffickers in Harris County, as Reported by State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies*
Source: National Drug Threat Survey 2009.
*
Seventeen law enforcement agencies in Harris County
responded to the NDTS 2009 as of February 12, 2009; Figure 6 represents the number
of these agencies that responded positively when asked if these money laundering
techniques were used in their jurisdictions.
8. Analysts derived these figures by multiplying the total quantity of Mexico- and Colombia-produced drugs available at the wholesale level in the United States by the wholesale prices for those drugs.
End of page.