Even their attorneys say the case will do little to stamp out abuses in farm-rich Florida.

``They are such a small part of a larger industry,'' Nelson Rodriguez-Varela, a Coral Gables attorney who represented Juan Ramos, said at sentencing. ``It's almost like catching the drug peddler in the street and blaming him for the large importation of drugs that come into this country. . . . And these defendants, you know, to be made examples of, really doesn't even make a dent in the industry.''

In an interview in Miami, Rodriguez-Varela asked: ``Should the Ramoses be in prison? No. You need the Ramoses to keep the price of oranges down.''

At trial, he and other defense attorneys questioned growers who hired their clients.

``These are not our employees,'' Richard Hetherton, director of human resources for Lykes Bros. in Tampa, said of the laborers who picked fruit under Ramiro Ramos' direction.

``Why don't you hire the workers directly?'' Rodriguez-Varela asked.

``It is too expensive,'' the Lykes official replied. ``We find it is a lot more efficient to use a contractor to provide the labor.''

``Efficient means cheaper, right?''

``OK,'' Hetherton replied. ``I would go with that.''

In an interview, Lykes Bros. Vice President Elizabeth Waters said the company is a responsible employer and had not been aware of ``the kinds of activities for which they were prosecuted.''

Consolidated Citrus, among the nation's largest growers, was still doing business with Ramiro Ramos at the time of the trial, a company official testified. Prosecutors said Ramos was known by some as El Diablo (The Devil).

``And we feel very strongly that people like Mr. Ramos . . . do a much better job of managing this than we would,'' testified Joaquin Mendiburo, Consolidated's manager of safety, labor and environmental compliance. ``. . . We prefer to stay away from any term that would classify us as co-employer.''

Consolidated officials did not respond to a request for an interview, referring calls instead to Kates' industry group.

At one point in court, Ramiro Ramos' attorney, Joaquin Perez, asked: ``Do you not think for one moment, you know, that the growers don't know what's going on?''

Such debate prompted U.S. District Judge K. Michael Moore to say at sentencing:

``It seems that there are others at another level in this system of fruit-picking, at a higher level, that to some extent are complicit in one way or another in how these activities occur.

``. . . They rely on migrant workers, and they create a legal fiction or corporation that insulates them between them and the workers themselves so that they can be relieved of any liability for the hiring of illegal immigrants. And yet they stand to benefit the most.''

The judge added: ``So, you know . . . the government has done its job in this particular case. But I think there is a broader interest out there that the government should look at as well.''

The courtroom debate pointed up a larger issue. When farmworkers are exploited, to what degree are farmers at fault? The answer has been hotly debated, but several court cases over the years have found that growers can be considered joint employers of the farmworkers ``and jointly responsible for the contractor's employees.''

Advocates for the farmworkers believe that many abuses of those workers go undetected in an industry often shrouded in secrecy because so many laborers work illegally.