Judge finds police acted reasonably in shooting New Mexico man while at wrong address
SANTA FE, N.M. — A federal judge has dismissed part of a lawsuit that accused police of violating constitutional protections when they fatally shot a man after showing up at the wrong address in response to a domestic violence call.
The shooting of Robert Dotson, 52, in the northwestern New Mexico city of Farmington prompted a civil lawsuit by his family members, though public prosecutors found there was no basis to pursue criminal charges against officers after a review of events. The suit alleged that the family was deprived of its civil rights and officers acted unreasonably.
Hearing a knock at the door late on April 5, 2023, Dotson put on a robe, went downstairs and grabbed a handgun before answering. Police outside shined a flashlight as Dotson appeared and raised the firearm before three police officers opened fire, killing him. Dotson did not shoot.
'Ultimately, given the significant threat Dotson posed when he pointed his firearm at officers ... the immediacy of that threat, the proximity between Dotson and the defendant officers, and considering that the events unfolded in only a few seconds, the court finds that the defendant officers reasonably applied deadly force,' U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Garcia said in a written court opinion.
The judge also said the officers were entitled under the circumstances to qualified immunity — special legal protections that prevent people from suing over claims that police or government workers violated their constitutional rights.
The opinion was published May 15 — the same day the U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously in a separate case that courts should weigh the totality of circumstances and not just a 'moment of threat' when judging challenges to police shootings under the Fourth Amendment.
Tom Clark, one of the Dotson family's attorneys, said the lawsuit against Farmington police will move forward on other claims under tort law and provisions of the New Mexico Civil Rights Act, which limits immunity for police and other government agencies.
Defense attorneys said in court filings that the officers acted reasonably under 'the totality of circumstances,' noting that they repeatedly knocked and announced that police had arrived and saying Dotson 'posed an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to police.'
Philip Stinson, a professor of criminal justice at Bowling Green State University in Ohio, said Tuesday that court evaluations of police immunity in shootings 'sometimes lead to results that end up leaving you scratching your head.'
'Here the court is saying the police made a mistake — but in that moment they were confronted with a decision to use deadly force,' he said. 'I don't think this is the last word in this case.'
Lawyers for Dotson's family emphasized that police were at the wrong address and that he was likely blinded by the flashlight with little inkling that police were there. They said officers did not give him sufficient time to comply with commands as an officer shouted, 'Hey, hands up.'
According to the lawsuit, Dotson's wife, wearing only a robe, came downstairs after hearing the shots and found her husband lying in the doorway. She fired outside, not knowing who was out there. Police fired 19 rounds but missed her.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
2 arrested with arsenal and Nazi paraphernalia after base robbery were ex-military, prosecutors say
SEATTLE — Two men arrested in Washington state with an arsenal that included dozens of guns, explosives and body armor, along with Nazi paraphernalia, were former military members who attacked a soldier with a hammer while stealing gear from Joint Base Lewis-McChord last weekend, investigators say. Levi Austin Frakes and Charles Ethan Fields were arrested Monday night at their home in Lacey, near Olympia, according to a criminal complaint filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court. Federal court records did not list an attorney for either man. One of the defendants told investigators the pair had been stealing equipment from the base for the past two years to sell or trade, and agents found about $24,000 in cash at the home, wrote Special Agent Christopher J. Raguse of the Army Criminal Investigation Division. Washington state business license records show that Frakes and Fields have a company called Sovereign Solutions, which featured an "SS" logo with the letters separated by a lightning bolt. Its website advertises "Quality Training and Equipment for the Modern Warfighter," including marksmanship classes, as well as a T-shirt with the company logo and the words "Professional War Crime Committer." The federal complaint charges them with robbery, assault and theft of government property. They also face investigation on state charges of unlawful possession of incendiary devices, short-barreled rifles and a machine gun. Each was being held at the Thurston County Jail on $500,000 bail. Agents found rifles staged at the upstairs windows, a probable cause affidavit filed in Thurston County Superior Court said. The federal complaint said agents "observed numerous Nazi/white supremacy memorabilia, murals, and literature in every bedroom and near several stockpiles of weapons and military equipment." Photos from inside the home included in court documents showed a wall decorated with a red Nazi flag emblazoned with a black swastika and a black SS flag — the letters shaped like lightning bolts — referencing the Schutzstaffel, the Nazi paramilitary led by Heinrich Himmler. According to the complaint, a soldier entered a building at the Army Ranger compound at Joint Base Lewis-McChord on Sunday night and found two men, partially masked, with a cluster of U.S. Army property around them. The soldier questioned them about what they were doing and told them to pull down their masks, which they did. A fight ensued, and one of the men brandished a hammer and struck the soldier in the head. The soldier continued to fight despite losing a large amount of blood and managed to get control of the hammer — at which point, one of the men pulled a knife. The soldier then let them go, the complaint said. They had attempted to steal about $14,000 worth of body armor, ballistic helmets and communications equipment Sunday, most of which they left behind when they dropped their rucksacks as they fled, the complaint said. During the fight, one of the men dropped his hat. It said "Fields" on the inside. Using base entry logs and surveillance video, investigators determined that Fields and Frakes had entered Lewis-McChord together about an hour before the attack, investigators said. Additionally, the wounded soldier, who required hospital treatment, told investigators that he asked around his unit about the name Fields after finding it on the hat. The soldier learned that Fields had been assigned to the Ranger Battalion around 2021, and he was able to identify him as one of the attackers based on photos shown to him by others in his unit, the complaint said. The men had access to the base because they were veterans, the probable cause statement filed in state court said. Court documents did not include details of Frakes' military service. Public information officers for Department of Defense, Joint Base Lewis-McChord and Army CID did not immediately provide further information about the men's service history in response to requests from The Associated Press. The FBI executed a search warrant at a home shared by the defendants on Monday and arrested them. Authorities said agents seized about 35 firearms at the home, including short-barreled rifles and an MG42 machine gun — a type typically supported with a bipod and which was used by German troops during World War II. Other seized gear included 3D-printed silencers and Army-issued gear that included explosives such as smoke grenade and blasting caps, ballistic plates and helmets, and night-vision devices, authorities said.
NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
Deported Guatemalan man back in U.S. after judge orders Trump administration to return him
A Guatemalan man who was deported by the Trump administration and then was ordered to be returned by a judge because of due process concerns is back in the United States, his attorney said Wednesday. The man, identified in court documents only as O.C.G., landed in the U.S. 'a few hours ago' and contacted his legal team upon arrival, Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance said Wednesday evening. O.C.G. was expected to be taken into federal custody, Realmuto said. The Trump administration deported O.C.G. to Mexico, where he had previously been held for ransom and raped as he traveled north to the U.S., in February. O.C.G. was put on a bus and sent to Mexico despite a federal judge granting O.C.G. a withholding of removal just two days earlier, court documents show. A withholding of removal is an order that prevents the United States from deporting someone to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened, based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group 'The Court has already found it likely that O.C.G.'s removal lacked due process,' U.S. District Judge Brian E. Murphy wrote in May, when he ordered the Trump administration to return him. Murphy, a judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, also wrote in that order that the government didn't put forth any evidence that due process was followed. 'The likelihood that O.C.G. is correct in asserting that his due-process rights were violated, in this Court's view, has long hovered near certainty,' Murphy wrote. O.C.G. is not the only person who has been deported from the United States only to have federal judges then order that the Trump administration return them. Kilmar Abrego Garcia was a deported in March to a notorious megaprison in El Salvador, and the Trump administration has not yet facilitated his return to the U.S. as ordered by a federal judge. Politico reported in May that another man, Venezuelan national Daniel Lozano-Camargo, was deported to the same prison, and a judge has ordered the U.S. to return him as well. O.C.G. fled Guatemala, where he said he endured persecution and torture, and came to the U.S. to claim asylum in March of 2024, but was denied and deported, according to court records. He then tried again, and while in Mexico traveling north to the U.S. he was held for ransom, raped and targeted for being gay, he said in a court declaration. In May 2024, a U.S. asylum officer determined O.C.G. 'had a reasonable fear' to return to Guatemala and was taken into immigration custody to see his case through. In February, an immigration judge determined that O.C.G. would most likely be persecuted if deported to his native Guatemala, and granted him a withholding of removal, court records show. Instead, he was placed on a bus to Mexico a few days later, without any notice. Mexico then sent him to Guatemala, where he went into hiding, according to court records, before he was returned to the U.S. Wednesday.
NBC News
2 days ago
- NBC News
Judge orders Trump administration to provide due process to some migrants deported to El Salvador
A federal judge today ordered the Trump administration to provide hundreds of migrants sent to CECOT, a maximum-security terrorism confinement center in El Salvador, habeas relief, ordering the government to provide the individuals an opportunity to challenge their detention and removal under President Donald Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. The order applies to all noncitizens removed from U.S. custody and transferred to CECOT "on March 15 and 16, 2025, pursuant solely to the Presidential Proclamation entitled 'Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of The United States by Tren De Aragua.'" It will not apply to migrants such as Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native removed from the country around the same time, but for reasons outside of Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. 'Defendants plainly deprived these individuals of their right to seek habeas relief before their summary removal from the United States — a right that need not itself be vindicated through a habeas petition,' U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg wrote in the order. 'Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members. But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so.' Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act in March to target members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the administration and accused of engaging in "mass illegal migration to the United States to further its objectives of harming United States citizens." By invoking the war-time law, Trump was able to swiftly detain and remove immigrants he claimed were members of the gang. One day after invoking the Act, the Trump administration announced it had deported hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members across at least two planes to El Salvador, even as Boasberg in a ruling at the time blocked the deportations and ordered any flights carrying migrants subject to the presidential proclamation return to the United States. The Trump administration challenged the block on its Alien Enemies Act deportations, but the ruling was upheld by the D.C. Circuit of Appeals. The U.S. Supreme Court later faulted the administration for giving the Venezuelan detainees only 24 hours to challenge their deportations before returning the case to an appeals court for further proceedings. Boasberg in his ruling noted that the Supreme Court unanimously agreed "that those subject to removal under the Act must be allowed to challenge their removability in federal court before being deported." "Defendants instead spirited away planeloads of people before any such challenge could be made. And now, significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those currently entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations," Boasberg wrote. Boasberg has provided the government a week to propose a plan as to "how they intend to facilitate the ability of the CECOT class to seek habeas relief," making clear the Venezuelan migrants must be granted the opportunity to contest their removal under the Alien Enemies Act, but conceding that "such a remedy may implicate sensitive diplomatic or national-security concerns." The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Lawyers for the non-profit groups representing the migrants praised Boasberg's ruling as affirming that the right to due process extends to individuals in the country illegally. 'The court properly recognized that the government cannot send people to a notorious foreign gulag without due process and then wash its hands of the situation,' said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who serves as lead counsel on the case.
