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.
Claim in dispute
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.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
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.
Timeline
3 timeline entries on this page. Dates: October 30, 2025 to May 6, 2026
October 2025
1 event
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]Criminal complaint and affidavit in United States v. Carlos Jimenez
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.
187 days between recorded events
May 2026
2 events
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.
[03]Order granting Carlos Jimenez's motion to compel
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.
[04]Stipulation to stay discovery production after Carlos Jimenez diversion agreement
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 1-3
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
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.
United States Department of Justice
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
Latest recorded positions: 8. Dates: October 30, 2025 to May 8, 2026
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
5 responses on this page
Greg Jackson "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."
Open source (opens in a new tab)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 dismissalCondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Why 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.
Read context and background
Jackson said the shooting was unlawful, the charges were baseless and Jimenez was complying with an order to drive away.
Role at the time: Civil attorney for Carlos Jimenez
Before the statement
Federal prosecutors agreed to dismiss the criminal case against Jimenez with prejudice.
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 dismissalAyah A. Sarsour "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."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Carlos Jimenez motion to compel government witness files and communicationsCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 53, pages 6-10 and 17-18CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Why 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.
Read context and background
Sarsour’s defense filing called the traffic stop aggressive and Ortiz’s use of near-lethal force improper.
Role at the time: Deputy federal public defender for Carlos Jimenez
Before the statement
Jimenez’s defense sought government witness personnel records and communications relevant to the shooting and prosecution.
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 17-18Chad Pennington "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."
Read the original text (opens in a new tab)Carlos Jimenez motion to compel government witness files and communicationsCase 5:25-cr-00366-KK, Document 53, pages 6-10 and 17-18CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
Why 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.
Read context and background
Pennington joined a defense filing that called the traffic stop aggressive and Ortiz’s use of near-lethal force improper.
Role at the time: Supervising deputy federal public defender for Carlos Jimenez
Before the statement
Jimenez’s defense sought government witness personnel records and communications relevant to the shooting and prosecution.
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 17-18Cynthia Santiago "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."
Open source (opens in a new tab)U.S. citizen shot from behind as he warned ICE agents about children gathering at bus stop, lawyers sayOpen source (opens in a new tab)Lawyers for US citizen shot by ICE agent say shooting was not self-defenseParagraphs 5-12CondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
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.
Read context and background
Santiago argued that Jimenez was trying to leave a frightening encounter and that the agents’ approach and use of deadly force were unjustified.
Role at the time: Attorney for Carlos Jimenez
Before the statement
Santiago said Jimenez became afraid after a masked agent drew a gun and shook pepper spray at him.
After the statement
She later described the episode as horrendous and blamed inadequate training and escalating violence in the community.
Robert Simon "He had to reverse to get away."
Open source (opens in a new tab)U.S. citizen shot from behind as he warned ICE agents about children gathering at bus stop, lawyers sayCondemnedCase context: Was ICE Officer Eusebio Ortiz justified in shooting Carlos Jimenez?
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.
Read context and background
Simon said the officers were unreasonably aggressive, violated their own policies and left Jimenez no safe option but to reverse away.
Role at the time: Attorney for Carlos Jimenez
Before the statement
DHS said Jimenez reversed toward officers; Simon and Santiago said he was trying to escape an escalating confrontation.
After the statement
Simon said the officers’ conduct violated their own policies.
Sources
(8)
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
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