Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
ICE officer Eusebio Ortiz shot Carlos Jimenez during an immigration operation in Ontario. The government says Jimenez reversed toward an officer; his lawyers say he was leaving. Court filings exposed evidence and interview disputes.
BackgroundWhen can federal immigration agents use deadly force?
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
On October 30, 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement deportation officer Eusebio Ortiz fired a shot that struck U.S. citizen Carlos Jimenez in the shoulder during an immigration enforcement operation in Ontario, California. A federal complaint alleged that Jimenez rapidly reversed his Lexus toward a Customs and Border Protection officer and a stopped Honda, causing the officer to fear a collision. Jimenez's attorneys said he was maneuvering away after warning agents that schoolchildren would soon arrive at a nearby bus stop, and that the bullet entered through the rear passenger window and struck his back shoulder. A federal court later ordered production of officer communications and use-of-force policies. The parties then entered a diversion agreement under which prosecutors may seek dismissal with prejudice after October 31, 2026. The dispute is whether Jimenez's vehicle posed an imminent threat when Ortiz fired.
Background: When can federal immigration agents use deadly force?
Read the full background
This case classifies responses to Ortiz's decision to fire at Jimenez on October 30, 2025. It is separate from whether officers could lawfully order Jimenez away from the scene or whether prosecutors had probable cause to charge him with assault.
The federal complaint (opens in a new tab) says Jimenez drove an unrelated Lexus beside a traffic stop, argued with officers, pulled forward, stopped, turned his wheels and then rapidly reversed toward CBP Officer N.J. and a Honda. The complaint says Ortiz fired at approximately that time and struck Jimenez in the shoulder. It records the government's probable-cause allegations, not a judicial finding about the shooting.
Jimenez's lawyers gave ABC News (opens in a new tab) a different account. They said Jimenez warned agents that children would soon gather at the location, tried to maneuver around them after an officer produced pepper spray and was shot through the rear passenger window while leaving. Their account is a defense position and remains disputed.
A defense discovery motion (opens in a new tab) identified Ortiz as the shooter and said he was interviewed more than a month later, unlike the other officers, and that his interview was not audio recorded. The motion also alleged missing communications and no body-worn or dash-camera recording of the incident. On May 5, 2026, the court ordered (opens in a new tab) the government to produce officer communications, operational directives and relevant policies, or provide sworn declarations where records did not exist.
The next day, the parties disclosed a diversion agreement (opens in a new tab). It states that prosecutors may move to dismiss the case with prejudice after the diversion term ends October 31, 2026. It does not say the case had already been dismissed, and Jimenez maintained his not-guilty plea.
People in this case
Greg JacksonCommented
Patty MurrayCommented
Norma TorresCommented
Hussam AyloushCommented
Timeline
6 timeline entries on this page. Dates: October 30, 2025 to May 7, 2026
October 2025
Ortiz shoots Jimenez during Ontario immigration operation
Incident
ICE deportation officer Eusebio Ortiz fired a shot that struck Carlos Jimenez in the shoulder after Jimenez stopped beside a federal immigration-enforcement operation. The parties dispute whether Jimenez's reversing vehicle threatened an officer.
[01]United States Department of Justice
Source excerpt
The Lexus then stopped, turned its wheels, and then rapidly accelerated in reverse back toward Officer N.J. and the Honda.
Federal probable-cause affidavit. It identifies E.O. as the officer who fired and says Jimenez reversed toward Officer N.J. and the stopped Honda. The affidavit presents the government's allegations, not adjudicated findings.
Criminal complaint and affidavit in United States v. Carlos Jimenez · United States Department of JusticeCase 5:25-mj-00674-DUTY, Document 1, pages 3-5[02]Lawyers for US citizen shot by ICE agent say shooting was not self-defense
Source excerpt
He was shot in his back shoulder, through the back passenger window.
ABC News reports the competing government and defense accounts. Jimenez's lawyers said he was maneuvering around the officers and leaving after warning about arriving schoolchildren; DHS said the officer fired defensive shots while fearing for his life.
November 2025
Grand jury indicts Jimenez on assault charge
A federal grand jury returned a one-count indictment charging Carlos Jimenez with assaulting CBP Officer N.J. on October 30, 2025, using a car as a deadly or dangerous weapon.
[03]Indictment, United States v. Carlos Jimenez
Source excerpt
defendant CARLOS JIMENEZ intentionally and forcibly assaulted, resisted, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with victim N.J., an employee of United States Customs and Border Protection … and in doing so, used a deadly and dangerous weapon, namely, a car.
One-count grand jury indictment charging Jimenez under 18 U.S.C. 111(a)(1) and (b) with assaulting CBP Officer N.J. on or about October 30, 2025.
Indictment, United States v. Carlos JimenezCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 15, pages 1-2Jimenez pleads not guilty
At his post-indictment arraignment, Jimenez pleaded not guilty to the assault charge. The case was assigned to Judge Kenly Kiya Kato and set for a January 12, 2026 jury trial, which was later postponed.
[04]Minutes of post-indictment arraignment, United States v. Carlos Jimenez
Source excerpt
Defendant pleads "not guilty" to all counts of the Indictment.
Criminal minutes from the November 25, 2025 arraignment before Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. Jimenez, represented by Deputy Federal Public Defender Ayah Sarsour, pleaded not guilty; the case was assigned to Judge Kenly Kiya Kato and set for a January 12, 2026 jury trial.
Minutes of post-indictment arraignment, United States v. Carlos JimenezCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 22, page 1
May 2026
Court orders production of officer communications and policies
The federal district court granted Jimenez's motion to compel and ordered the government to produce incident-related communications, operational directives and relevant use-of-force materials, or sworn declarations where records did not exist.
[05]United States Department of Justice
Source excerpt
The Court hereby grants defendant's motion to compel.
Court order directing the government to produce incident-related officer communications, operational directives, use-of-force policies and related records, with sworn declarations if responsive material did not exist.
Order granting Carlos Jimenez's motion to compel · United States Department of JusticeCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 64, pages 1-3Parties disclose pretrial diversion agreement
The parties told the court they had reached a diversion agreement under which prosecutors may seek dismissal with prejudice after the diversion term ends October 31, 2026. Jimenez maintained his not-guilty plea.
[06]United States Department of Justice
Source excerpt
The government may move to dismiss this matter with prejudice after the term of diversion ending October 31, 2026.
Joint stipulation stating that the parties reached a diversion agreement and that the government may seek dismissal with prejudice after October 31, 2026. It also says Jimenez maintained his not-guilty plea.
Stipulation to stay discovery production after Carlos Jimenez diversion agreement · United States Department of JusticeCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 65, pages 1-3Court postpones Jimenez trial to December 7
Judge Kenly Kiya Kato approved the parties' diversion agreement and moved Carlos Jimenez's trial from June 22 to December 7, 2026. The May 7 order excluded the intervening period from the statutory speedy-trial calculation.
[07]May 7 order continuing the Carlos Jimenez trial
The court approved the parties' diversion agreement and continued the trial to December 7, 2026. The order lists different November conference dates in its header and numbered provisions.
May 7 order continuing the Carlos Jimenez trialUnited States v. Jimenez, 5:25-cr-00366-KK, ECF 67, filed May 7, 2026, pages 1-3, order paragraphs 1-3.
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
United States Department of Justice
Jimenez rapidly accelerated in reverse toward CBP Officer N.J. and a stopped Honda, causing N.J. to fear that the Lexus would strike her and the Honda.
Sources (1)
- Criminal complaint and affidavit in United States v. Carlos Jimenez · United States Department of JusticeCase 5:25-mj-00674-DUTY, Document 1, pages 3-5
Disputed claim
Ortiz's shooting of Jimenez was not self-defense; Jimenez was maneuvering away after warning agents that schoolchildren would soon gather nearby.
Sources (1)
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
12 responses. First 6 shown initially. Newest first.
Greg JacksonCivil attorney for Carlos JimenezBefore this statement
Federal prosecutors agreed to dismiss the criminal case against Jimenez with prejudice.
"their agreement to dismiss with prejudice bolsters our own argument that the shooting itself was unlawful and the charges against Mr. Jimenez entirely fabricated and baseless. The shooter, Agent Ortiz, violated department policy by firing his weapon at a moving vehicle, and Mr. Jimenez was in fact complying with Mr. Ortiz’s orders to drive away when Mr. Ortiz tried to murder him and shot him anyway."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Jackson said the shooting was unlawful, the charges were baseless and Jimenez was complying with an order to drive away.
After the statement
Jackson cited the dismissal as support for the civil claim that the shooting and prosecution were wrongful.
U.S. Attorney’s Office Disposed Toward Dismissing Charges Against Ontario Man Shot By ICE AgentParagraphs recounting Jimenez’s hearing testimony and Greg Jackson’s response to dismissalWhy this label?
He explicitly calls the shooting unlawful and accuses the agent of trying to murder Jimenez.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Ayah A. SarsourDeputy federal public defender for Carlos Jimenez Before this statement
Jimenez’s defense sought government witness personnel records and communications relevant to the shooting and prosecution.
"This case is yet another matter stemming from an aggressive ICE traffic stop and interaction with the public that resulted in catastrophic consequences and the subsequent filing of an unsupportable criminal charge. Indeed, this case fits a recent and endemic national pattern of ICE using aggressive traffic stop techniques and then employing the improper use of near-lethal force against an American citizen."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Sarsour’s defense filing called the traffic stop aggressive and Ortiz’s use of near-lethal force improper.
After the statement
The motion argued that Ortiz may have used excessive force and that Jimenez acted appropriately.
Carlos Jimenez motion to compel government witness files and communicationsCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 53, pages 6-10 and 17-18Why this label?
The filing directly condemns the tactics and force used in the encounter.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Chad PenningtonSupervising deputy federal public defender for Carlos Jimenez Before this statement
Jimenez’s defense sought government witness personnel records and communications relevant to the shooting and prosecution.
"This case is yet another matter stemming from an aggressive ICE traffic stop and interaction with the public that resulted in catastrophic consequences and the subsequent filing of an unsupportable criminal charge. Indeed, this case fits a recent and endemic national pattern of ICE using aggressive traffic stop techniques and then employing the improper use of near-lethal force against an American citizen."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Pennington joined a defense filing that called the traffic stop aggressive and Ortiz’s use of near-lethal force improper.
After the statement
The motion argued that Ortiz may have used excessive force and that Jimenez acted appropriately.
Carlos Jimenez motion to compel government witness files and communicationsCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 53, pages 6-10 and 17-18Why this label?
As a signatory to the filing, he directly condemns the tactics and force used in the encounter.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Patty MurrayU.S. senator for WashingtonBefore this statement
Murray said that, according to his attorney, Jimenez, a U.S. citizen, stopped to tell agents they were blocking an elementary school bus stop, that an officer pointed a gun at his face, and that he was shot in the shoulder as he pulled forward to leave.
"Now the DHS version of events is once again ridiculous. They say that officers fired at him after he tried to run them over. Though—as with so many other cases—there is basically no evidence of that so far."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Sen. Patty Murray called DHS's account of the shooting of Carlos Jimenez ridiculous, saying there is basically no evidence that he tried to run officers over and that the bullet entered through his rear passenger window as he drove away.
After the statement
She said the bullet went in through the rear passenger window and that Jimenez was arrested at the hospital before he could get full treatment.
Murray's March 10 remarks on immigration-agent shootings · Patty MurrayMARIMAR MARTINEZ, JULIO CESAR SOSA-CELIS and CARLOS JIMENEZ sectionsWhy this label?
The reference point is Officer Eusebio Ortiz's gunfire at Carlos Jimenez. Murray rejects DHS's account that Jimenez tried to run officers over and says he was shot from behind as he drove away, which rejects the justification for the shooting. The closest competing label is Challenged characterization, but she disputes the basis for the shooting itself, not a label.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Greg JacksonAttorney representing Carlos Jimenez
Before this statement
ABC7 reported that Jackson disputed ICE's claim that Jimenez tried to ram officers. Jackson first said, "We're very concerned."
"It's not the first time we've seen ICE agents shoot at people with little to zero provocation."
CondemnedResponding to: Ortiz's shooting of Jimenez was not self-defense; Jimenez was maneuvering away after warning agents that schoolchildren would soon gather nearby.
Full statement and sources
Speaking to ABC7 about two weeks after the shooting, Jackson disputed ICE's account. He said Jimenez backed up to follow an officer's order to leave, was shot as he pulled forward, and that ICE agents had fired on people before with little or no provocation.
After the statement
Jackson said Jimenez had stopped to warn agents about a school bus stop, that an officer pointed a gun at him and then drew pepper spray, and that he was shot as he drove away.
Attorney for Ontario man shot by ICE agent disputes claim that his client tried to assault officersOpening paragraphs, quotes from attorney Greg JacksonWhy this label?
The reference point is Ortiz's decision to fire at Jimenez. Jackson places this shooting among ICE shootings with little to zero provocation, a direct criticism of the decision to fire. Challenged the characterization loses because he goes beyond disputing ICE's description of the reversing car and judges the shooting itself. Evidence: ABC7 Los Angeles report quoting him directly.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Norma TorresU.S. representative for California's 35th DistrictBefore this statement
Torres said Jimenez was reportedly shot from behind while warning agents about children at a bus stop, while federal officials described the shot as defensive. She said, "Transparency is not optional."
"My letter to Acting Director Lyons and Director Patel puts them on notice: Americans in our communities will not be endangered by secretive, reckless federal enforcement. We need transparency into what happened in Ontario, and what is going on around this nation."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Announcing a letter to ICE and FBI leaders, Torres said Americans would not be endangered by secretive, reckless federal enforcement and asked whether officers wore body cameras and what consequences they would face for any violations.
After the statement
The release lists her questions on body cameras, witness statements, notice to local police and consequences if agents violated law or policy.
Congresswoman Norma Torres demands accountability after ICE shoots U.S. citizen in Ontario · Norma TorresPress release, Torres quote following the description of her letterWhy this label?
The reference point is Ortiz's decision to fire at Jimenez. Torres sets the defense account against the federal description of the shot as defensive and asks for transparency into what happened, which disputes the official account without judging the shooting itself. Her warning against reckless enforcement is general and forward-looking, so Condemned is not supported. This matches the label on her October 30 statement. Evidence: her official press release.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Show fewer responses
Hussam AyloushExecutive director of the Greater Los Angeles office of the Council on American-Islamic RelationsBefore this statement
The release set out the defense account that Jimenez was shot from behind while leaving and the DHS account that he reversed at officers.
"We are deeply concerned by ICE’s shooting of Carlos Jimenez. This action reflects a broader pattern of brazen and violent immigration enforcement operations being carried out by federal agents throughout the greater Los Angeles area."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
In a CAIR-LA press release, Ayloush said he was deeply concerned by the shooting, called it part of a pattern of brazen and violent immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area and asked for an independent investigation.
After the statement
Ayloush said the intimidation of immigrants and communities of color must end and called for an independent, transparent investigation.
CAIR-LA expresses concern over shooting of Carlos Jimenez and calls for independent probe · Council on American-Islamic RelationsPress release, statement attributed to Executive Director Hussam AyloushWhy this label?
The reference point is Ortiz's decision to fire at Jimenez. Ayloush calls the shooting itself part of a pattern of brazen and violent enforcement, which is a criticism of the act. Challenged the characterization is the closer alternative because he also asks for an independent investigation, but he does not wait for that inquiry before judging the shooting. Evidence: the organization's own press release quoting him.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Cynthia SantiagoAttorney for Carlos Jimenez Before this statement
Santiago said Jimenez became afraid after a masked agent drew a gun and shook pepper spray at him.
"Then there was a shot from the side, back passenger window, to the car. Use of deadly force is to be used as a last resort. Coming out to communities with guns drawn is the opposite."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Santiago argued that Jimenez was trying to leave a frightening encounter and that the agents’ approach and use of deadly force were unjustified.
After the statement
She later described the episode as horrendous and blamed inadequate training and escalating violence in the community.
Why this label?
She explicitly contrasts the shooting with the last-resort standard for deadly force and criticizes the agents’ armed approach.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Robert SimonAttorney for Carlos Jimenez Before this statement
DHS said Jimenez reversed toward officers; Simon and Santiago said he was trying to escape an escalating confrontation.
"He had to reverse to get away."
CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Simon said the officers were unreasonably aggressive, violated their own policies and left Jimenez no safe option but to reverse away.
After the statement
Simon said the officers’ conduct violated their own policies.
Why this label?
He rejects the self-defense account and attributes the danger to the officers’ aggressive conduct.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Carlos JimenezPerson shot by an ICE agentDirectly involved Before this statement
At his October 31, 2025 court hearing, Jimenez said he had asked officers at a traffic stop to be careful because children would soon arrive at a nearby school bus stop. He said one officer then drew his gun and approached him, prompting him to raise his voice.
"Are you really going to shoot an American citizen?"
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Jimenez told the court he was shot as he was backing up during a three-point turn to drive away, after an officer approached him with a gun and he was told to leave. The San Bernardino County Sentinel reported that part of his account in its own words. The quoted question is what Jimenez said he asked when the armed officer approached.
After the statement
Jimenez said an officer armed with a gun and pepper spray then told him to leave. He said he was shot as he was backing up during a three-point turn to drive away. The account became part of the dispute over whether his vehicle threatened the agent.
U.S. Attorney’s Office Disposed Toward Dismissing Charges Against Ontario Man Shot By ICE AgentParagraphs recounting Jimenez’s hearing testimony and Greg Jackson’s response to dismissalWhy this label?
His account directly challenges the characterization that he drove at the agent in a way that justified deadly force.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Tricia McLaughlinDepartment of Homeland Security assistant secretary for public affairsBefore this statement
DHS was explaining why an ICE officer opened fire during the Ontario traffic-stop encounter.
"The car stopped and attempted to run officers over by reversing directly at them without stopping. An ICE officer, fearing for his life, fired defensive shots at the vehicle."
Defended or excusedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
McLaughlin said Jimenez drove at the officers and characterized Ortiz’s gunfire as defensive.
After the statement
McLaughlin called the episode an example of the threats ICE officers face while enforcing immigration law.
Why this label?
She supplies the government’s justification for the shooting and explicitly describes the shots as defensive.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Norma TorresU.S. representative for California
Before this statement
DHS said Jimenez had reversed his car directly at officers, prompting defensive gunfire.
"There must be a full, transparent investigation with immediate updates. As we’ve seen in numerous incidents over the past several months, statements from the Department cannot be taken at face value. Witness statements, body-camera footage, security footage, and all relevant information must be released so the public can judge for themselves what really happened. Accountability is not optional; it is demanded."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Full statement and sources
Torres said DHS’s version could not be accepted at face value and demanded release of the evidence needed to evaluate the shooting.
After the statement
Torres asked for witness accounts, body-camera footage, security video and other evidence to be made public.
Why this label?
She directly disputes the reliability of the government’s justification but stops short of reaching a final judgment on whether the shooting was justified.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(15)
Original text
Criminal complaint and affidavit in United States v. Carlos Jimenez
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-mj-00674-DUTY, Document 1, pages 3-5
Excerpt
"The Lexus then stopped, turned its wheels, and then rapidly accelerated in reverse back toward Officer N.J. and the Honda."
About this source
Federal probable-cause affidavit. It identifies E.O. as the officer who fired and says Jimenez reversed toward Officer N.J. and the stopped Honda. The affidavit presents the government's allegations, not adjudicated findings.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
May 7 order continuing the Carlos Jimenez trial
Relevant passage: United States v. Jimenez, 5:25-cr-00366-KK, ECF 67, filed May 7, 2026, pages 1-3, order paragraphs 1-3.
About this source
The court approved the parties' diversion agreement and continued the trial to December 7, 2026. The order lists different November conference dates in its header and numbered provisions.
- Author
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Judge Kenly Kiya Kato
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Murray's March 10 remarks on immigration-agent shootings
Relevant passage: MARIMAR MARTINEZ, JULIO CESAR SOSA-CELIS and CARLOS JIMENEZ sections
About this source
Official transcript with Murray's case-specific criticisms.
- Author
- Patty Murray
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Minutes of post-indictment arraignment, United States v. Carlos Jimenez
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 22, page 1
Excerpt
"Defendant pleads "not guilty" to all counts of the Indictment."
About this source
Criminal minutes from the November 25, 2025 arraignment before Magistrate Judge Sheri Pym. Jimenez, represented by Deputy Federal Public Defender Ayah Sarsour, pleaded not guilty; the case was assigned to Judge Kenly Kiya Kato and set for a January 12, 2026 jury trial.
- Author
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Indictment, United States v. Carlos Jimenez
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 15, pages 1-2
Excerpt
"defendant CARLOS JIMENEZ intentionally and forcibly assaulted, resisted, impeded, intimidated, and interfered with victim N.J., an employee of United States Customs and Border Protection … and in doing so, used a deadly and dangerous weapon, namely, a car."
About this source
One-count grand jury indictment charging Jimenez under 18 U.S.C. 111(a)(1) and (b) with assaulting CBP Officer N.J. on or about October 30, 2025.
- Author
- U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, October 2025 Grand Jury
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Congresswoman Norma Torres demands accountability after ICE shoots U.S. citizen in Ontario
Relevant passage: Press release, Torres quote following the description of her letter
Excerpt
"My letter to Acting Director Lyons and Director Patel puts them on notice: Americans in our communities will not be endangered by secretive, reckless federal enforcement. We need transparency into what happened in Ontario, and what is going on around this nation."
About this source
Torres announces a letter to Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons and FBI Director Kash Patel about the shooting of Carlos Jimenez. The release sets the defense account against the federal description of the shot as defensive and lists her questions about body cameras, witness statements, notice to local police and consequences for any violations.
- Author
- Office of Rep. Norma Torres
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Attorney for Ontario man shot by ICE agent disputes claim that his client tried to assault officers
Relevant passage: Opening paragraphs, quotes from attorney Greg Jackson
Excerpt
""We're very concerned," said attorney Greg Jackson, who represents Carlos Jimenez, the man arrested by ICE. "It's not the first time we've seen ICE agents shoot at people with little to zero provocation.""
About this source
ABC7 Los Angeles report, about two weeks after the shooting, in which Jimenez's attorney Greg Jackson disputes ICE's account that Jimenez tried to run officers over. Jackson says Jimenez backed up to follow an officer's instruction to leave and was shot as he pulled forward. The report also carries ICE's account.
- Author
- Rob McMillan
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
CAIR-LA expresses concern over shooting of Carlos Jimenez and calls for independent probe
Relevant passage: Press release, statement attributed to Executive Director Hussam Ayloush
Excerpt
"We are deeply concerned by ICE’s shooting of Carlos Jimenez. This action reflects a broader pattern of brazen and violent immigration enforcement operations being carried out by federal agents throughout the greater Los Angeles area."
About this source
Press release from the Greater Los Angeles office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. It summarizes the competing DHS and defense accounts, quotes Executive Director Hussam Ayloush and calls for an independent, transparent investigation. The release gives the incident date as October 28; court filings and other reports date the shooting to October 30, 2025.
- Author
- CAIR Los Angeles
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
2 California ICE shootings in nine days: Latest confrontation leaves bloody scene
Excerpt
"“An ICE officer, fearing for his life, fired defensive shots at the vehicle.”"
About this source
Contemporaneous Los Angeles Times reporting on the Ontario shooting, including statements from DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin and Rep. Norma Torres.
- Author
- Rachel Uranga and Brittny Mejia
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
U.S. citizen shot from behind as he warned ICE agents about children gathering at bus stop, lawyers say
Excerpt
"“Use of deadly force is to be used as a last resort. Coming out to communities with guns drawn is the opposite.”"
About this source
Los Angeles Times follow-up reporting presenting the account and legal assessment of Carlos Jimenez’s attorneys Cynthia Santiago and Robert Simon.
- Author
- Rachel Uranga
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
U.S. Attorney’s Office Disposed Toward Dismissing Charges Against Ontario Man Shot By ICE Agent
Relevant passage: Paragraphs recounting Jimenez’s hearing testimony and Greg Jackson’s response to dismissal
Excerpt
"It was as he was backing up that he was shot, Jimenez said."
About this source
The article recounts competing accounts of the shooting and reports that federal prosecutors agreed to dismiss the criminal case with prejudice.
- Author
- Mark Gutglueck
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Stipulation to stay discovery production after Carlos Jimenez diversion agreement
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 65, pages 1-3
Excerpt
"The government may move to dismiss this matter with prejudice after the term of diversion ending October 31, 2026."
About this source
Joint stipulation stating that the parties reached a diversion agreement and that the government may seek dismissal with prejudice after October 31, 2026. It also says Jimenez maintained his not-guilty plea.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Lawyers for US citizen shot by ICE agent say shooting was not self-defense
Relevant passage: Paragraphs 5-12
Excerpt
"He was shot in his back shoulder, through the back passenger window."
About this source
ABC News reports the competing government and defense accounts. Jimenez's lawyers said he was maneuvering around the officers and leaving after warning about arriving schoolchildren; DHS said the officer fired defensive shots while fearing for his life.
- Author
- Laura Romero
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Order granting Carlos Jimenez's motion to compel
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 64, pages 1-3
Excerpt
"The Court hereby grants defendant's motion to compel."
About this source
Court order directing the government to produce incident-related officer communications, operational directives, use-of-force policies and related records, with sworn declarations if responsive material did not exist.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Carlos Jimenez motion to compel government witness files and communications
Relevant passage: Case 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 53, pages 6-10 and 17-18
Excerpt
"Ortiz was not interviewed until over a month later."
About this source
Defense motion identifying Ortiz as the shooter and describing discovery disputes, including the unrecorded delayed interview of Ortiz, claimed missing communications and the asserted absence of body-worn or dash-camera footage. The allegations about discovery are advocacy positions unless adopted by the court.
- Published
- Accessed
Corrections
(2)
Corrections address errors in our reporting or labels. When a speaker changes their position, we add a separate statement and link it to the earlier one.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Statement by Greg Jackson
- Previous language
- Jackson cited the dismissal as support for the civil claim that the shooting and prosecution were wrongful.
- Corrected language
- Jackson cited the agreement for a possible future dismissal as support for his civil claim that the shooting and prosecution were wrongful.
We described Greg Jackson as citing a completed dismissal. His May 8 remarks concerned a diversion agreement for a future dismissal. The May 6 court filing says prosecutors may seek dismissal with prejudice after the diversion term ends on October 31, 2026. It does not record a completed dismissal. The context should distinguish the agreement from a dismissal order.
This corrects our account of what happened.
Joint stipulation stating that the parties reached a diversion agreement and that the government may seek dismissal with prejudice after October 31, 2026. It also says Jimenez maintained his not-guilty plea.
The article recounts competing accounts of the shooting and reports that federal prosecutors agreed to dismiss the criminal case with prejudice.
Reporting correction
Correction to: Statement by Carlos Jimenez
- Previous language
- “It was as he was backing up that he was shot,” Jimenez said.
- Corrected language
- Are you really going to shoot an American citizen?
We presented the San Bernardino County Sentinel's paraphrase of Jimenez's account as his direct quotation. The article did not quote those words. The entry now quotes only words the article attributes to Jimenez and describes the rest of his account in the summary.
This corrects our account of what happened.
The article recounts competing accounts of the shooting and reports that federal prosecutors agreed to dismiss the criminal case with prejudice.
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/ice-eusebio-ortiz-shooting-carlos-jimenez-justified
The Dispute Index. "Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?". First published: 2026-07-15. Last updated: 2026-10-06. https://disputeindex.com/cases/ice-eusebio-ortiz-shooting-carlos-jimenez-justified