Daily Archives: January 20, 2022

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that a deputy from the Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office was justified in his use of deadly force against 35-year-old Daniel Lighty on December 9, 2021. Our review determined that several Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office deputies responded to multiple 911 calls of a man in a Brandon parking lot firing numerous rounds from a handgun. When uniformed deputies arrived, they observed Daniel Lighty, armed with a gun, standing near a minivan in the parking lot of the Washed Up Car Wash. Lighty was firing his gun indiscriminately in the middle of the day near a busy road, endangering the lives of members of the public as well as the responding law enforcement officers. Surveillance and body worn camera video then show Lighty directing his fire at the responding deputies and ignoring repeated warnings to drop his weapon. Lighty fired multiple rounds at the deputies from his 9mm pistol. In response to this, one of the deputies fired his weapon three times at Lighty. Neither Lighty nor the deputy was struck. In reaching this conclusion, our office conducted an exhaustive review of all available evidence and applicable legal standards. These steps included but were not limited to:

• reviewing interviews of the involved law enforcement officers
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls, radio communications, body worn camera footage, and relevant audio
• applying the applicable laws

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation. The investigation found that 911 calls from members of the public began coming in at approximately 12:48 p.m. on Friday, December 9, 2021, and deputies arrived at approximately 12:53 p.m. Multiple 911 calls described Lighty’s location and the fact that he was firing several times and reloading before law enforcement arrived. Responding deputies encountered Lighty, armed with a gun, in the parking lot of the Washed Up Car Wash at 834 East Brandon Blvd.

Surveillance video shows Lighty firing multiple rounds prior to law enforcement’s arrival. The surveillance video also shows Lighty continuing to fire his gun after the deputies arrived and directed him to drop his weapon. Lighty is seen on video firing in the direction of deputies. There is also damage to the building where the deputies were seeking cover consistent with Lighty’s shots, as well as body worn camera footage from multiple deputies. A responding deputy’s vehicle was struck by a bullet fired by Lighty while the deputy was responding to the scene and before any shots were fired by a member of law enforcement.

Lighty was warned to drop his weapon several times before the deputy fired, but the warnings were ignored. The deputy fired three rounds from his handgun. None of the rounds struck Lighty. After being fired on by the deputy, Lighty continued to fire his 9mm pistol toward the deputies. This incident occurred in the middle of the day near busy Brandon Blvd., endangering the lives of many people in addition to threatening the lives of the responding law enforcement officers.

Members of the crisis response team from HCSO were ultimately able to make phone contact with Lighty and convince him to surrender. A search warrant was executed on Lighty’s minivan, revealing two 9mm pistols on the front passenger side as well as 200 rounds of unspent 9mm ammunition. A total of 76 spent shell casings were recovered in the area where Lighty had been standing—in the parking lot of the car wash and inside the minivan. Firearms analysis by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement determined that the two pistols in Lighty’s minivan had fired all 76 of the spent casings. No one was injured.

The name of the law enforcement officer is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence of this incident prove that the law enforcement officer reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself, other deputies, and civilians when he used deadly force. He also did not have a duty to retreat. These findings satisfy Florida Statutes 776.012 and 776.05 and, therefore, under Florida law, the use of deadly force is justified. Accordingly, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against the deputy.

Our office typically includes an initial release of materials when publishing a use of deadly force review; that is not possible in this case because the materials are all evidence in an active criminal investigation. Under Fla. Statute 119.071(2)(c), evidence in active criminal investigations is exempt from release. Documents related to the case may be available in the future once all cases are resolved. Under Florida’s Public Records Law, any member of the public can make a request. Find details on making a request on the State Attorney’s Office Public Records page.

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that we cannot refute that a male victim (“Victim 1”) acted in lawful self-defense and in defense of another in the use of deadly force against 54-year-old Levi Jones, Jr. on September 30, 2021. Investigators determined that after Jones got into a dispute with two people—Victim 1 and another man (“Victim 2”)—Jones pulled out a handgun and shot Victim 1 multiple times, causing him to fall to the ground. Jones then shot Victim 2. After Victim 2 fell to the ground, Jones began physically beating Victim 2 with the gun. In response, Victim 1 pulled out a gun and shot Jones in self-defense and in defense of Victim 2. In reaching this conclusion, our office conducted an exhaustive review of all available evidence and applicable legal standards. These steps included but were not limited to:

• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing 911 calls
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing responding law enforcement officer body worn camera footage
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation. Investigators learned that officers were dispatched to 4804 35th Circle in Tampa’s Jackson Heights neighborhood in response to a ShotSpotter activation due to the detection of eight rounds of gunfire. Responding officers observed Victim 1, Victim 2, and Levi Jones, Jr. lying on the ground in a vacant lot on the northwest corner of Osborne Avenue and 35th Circle. There were several other people at the scene, standing near the people on the ground. Lifesaving measures were performed by first responders on all three men, and they were transported to local hospitals for treatment. An unidentified male witness approached one of the officers and stated that Victim 2 and Jones had shot one another.

An eyewitness stated that the incident stemmed from a long-standing dispute between Jones and Victim 2, and another eyewitness said it stemmed from a drug deal that occurred earlier in the day.

Victim 2 approached Jones while Jones was seated in the driver’s seat of a parked Ford F-150. Moments later, Jones pulled out a gun and pointed it toward Victim 2, causing Victim 2 to immediately retreat. Victim 1 then approached Jones to confront him about Jones pulling a gun on Victim 2. Jones then fired the gun at Victim 1. Victim 1 fell to the ground, and Jones continued to fire several more times at Victim 1 while he was lying on the ground. Then Jones ran toward Victim 2 and shot Victim 2. Jones stood over Victim 2 and began hitting him with the gun. In response, Victim 1 pulled out his own firearm and fired one shot at Jones. Jones was shot in the head and later was pronounced dead at the hospital.

Victim 2 was shot in the hands, buttocks, and right leg. He later died as a result of these gunshot wounds on October 16, 2021. Victim 1 was shot multiple times and was transported to the hospital. Detectives interviewed Victim 1 in ICU. He appeared to be uncooperative and was reluctant to provide information or details regarding the shooting and who was involved. Victim 1 never admitted to possessing a firearm or shooting it during the incident. He survived his gunshot wound injuries.

All firearms were taken and removed from the scene prior to law enforcement’s arrival. Seven total fired casings were recovered from the scene and submitted for analysis. Six of the casings had been fired from the same gun and one had been fired from a different gun—which is consistent with the eyewitness accounts that only two guns were involved and that Jones fired his gun multiple times at Victim 2, while Victim 1 had fired his gun only once at Jones.

The names of the victims are being withheld due to Marsy’s Law.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence cannot refute that Victim 1 reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or Victim 2 when he used deadly force. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012. Accordingly, under Florida law, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against Victim 1.

An initial release of materials related to this case is available at this link. These items illustrate the crime scene and key details of the case. Further documents related to the case, including additional photos, reports, and interview transcripts, are available to any member of the public subject to Florida’s Public Records Law; find details on making a request on the State Attorney’s Office Public Records page.

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that we cannot refute the assertion by the victim that he acted in lawful self-defense in the use of deadly force against Kyle Shelton on October 4, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with the victim’s assertion that he repeatedly requested and then demanded that Kyle Shelton leave his home, yet Shelton refused to leave and threatened to hurt the victim. The victim asserts that he then armed himself with a gun and again demanded that Shelton leave. The victim asserts that Shelton then shoved the victim to the ground, and—as the victim fell to the ground—the firearm in his hand accidentally discharged and Shelton was shot in the chest. Shelton died from this wound. In reaching this conclusion, our office conducted an exhaustive review of all available evidence and applicable legal standards. These steps included but were not limited to:

• reviewing police reports
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls, radio communications, and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation and determined that on October 4, 2021, around 04:49 a.m., law enforcement responded to a home in West Tampa in reference to a shooting incident. Upon arrival, law enforcement located Kyle Shelton inside the home with an apparent gunshot wound.  Shelton was taken to a hospital where he was pronounced dead. The medical examiner later determined that Shelton died as a result of a single gunshot wound to his chest.

Investigation revealed that in addition to the victim and Shelton, there were two other people in the home at the time of the shooting, referred to here as Witness 1 and Witness 2.

Witness 1 was interviewed by detectives and told them that she was a friend of the victim and had been staying with the victim for several days. On the night of this incident, Witness 1 stated that Shelton came to the house around 10:00 p.m. to socialize with the victim. Shelton and the victim later went to the store to buy alcohol and returned with a young woman (Witness 2). Shortly after arriving at the home, Witness 2 began to ask Shelton to give her a ride home and Shelton refused. The victim then confronted Shelton about taking Witness 2 home. Shortly afterward, Witness 1 heard an argument and what sounded like something physical, then a gunshot. Witness 1 did not witness the actual shooting.

Witness 2 was interviewed by detectives and she explained that she had met Shelton and the victim at a local convenience store and asked them to give her a ride to her home. Shelton indicated that he would drive her to where she lived and she went with the men to the victim’s home with the anticipation that Shelton would then take her to her home. Once they got to the victim’s house Shelton refused to take her home; she then asked the victim and Witness 1 to take her home. Witness 2 then complained to the victim that Shelton had promised to take her home, which prompted the victim to confront Shelton about taking Witness 2 to her house. Later, Witness 2 was with Witness 1 in one of the bedrooms when they heard arguing, a physical fight, and then a gunshot. Witness 2 did not witness the fight or the gunshot. Once the shooting happened, Witness 2 ran out of the house.

The victim was interviewed by detectives following the incident. The victim advised that he and Shelton went to a local convenience store to buy alcohol and came into contact with Witness 2, who was asking for a ride home. Shelton agreed to take her home and brought her back to the victim’s house. Once they arrived, Witness 2 would not stop bothering everyone for a ride home and was complaining that Shelton had promised her a ride home. The victim then confronted Shelton, who was lying in bed in the spare bedroom, about taking Witness 2 home. He and Shelton argued for approximately five minutes and then the victim told Shelton that Shelton needed to leave the house. Shelton then refused to leave and told the victim, “I’m going to f— you up,” and, “Step one foot into this room and see what happens.”

The victim explained that he then got a gun from within the house both to protect himself and with the hope that the gun would persuade Shelton to leave. As the victim walked through his house into the kitchen, he ran into Shelton and told Shelton, “Now you’re going to leave.” The victim advised that Shelton then shoved him in the chest with both hands, causing him to fall backwards and trip over a case of bottled water that was on the floor behind him. As the victim was falling backwards, the gun went off accidentally. The victim advised that he had no intention of shooting Shelton. He immediately called 911 to report the shooting. The victim further said that he and Shelton had engaged in an argument three months before, during which Shelton had thrown him to the ground.

A short time after the victim’s interview, he agreed to participate in a video walkthrough of the shooting. In the video, the victim demonstrated his interaction with Shelton in the kitchen of the home and re-enacted the physical altercation, which included showing where and how he fell backwards and his position when the gun discharged.

Crime scene technicians located damage to the ceiling of the kitchen that was in an area above and behind where the victim indicated Shelton had been standing when the gun went off. The area of this damage is consistent with the victim’s account of the gun being near the floor when it discharged.

The weapon in this case, a .357 caliber revolver, belonged to the victim and was kept by him in his bedroom. Ammunition for the firearm was located in the area where the victim indicated he kept the weapon. The revolver was examined by a firearms examiner and test fired and was found to function as designed.

An autopsy examination was conducted by the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office. The cause of Shelton’s death was determined to be a gunshot wound to the chest. The direction of travel of the bullet as it passed through Shelton’s body was able to be determined and was consistent with the gun being discharged from an area in front of and below Shelton. This medical evidence is consistent with the victim’s account of the incident. Toxicology testing was also conducted by the Medical Examiner’s Office. Shelton’s blood alcohol level was determined to be 0.17 g/dL which is at a level that would be over twice the legal limit allowed for operation of a motor vehicle.

The name of the victim is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence cannot refute the statements by the victim that the firearm was discharged accidentally and a claim that the victim lawfully defended himself from the commission of a forcible felony or reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when he used deadly force. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012. Accordingly, under Florida law, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against the victim.

An initial release of materials related to this case is available at this link. These items illustrate the crime scene and key details of the case. Further documents related to the case, including additional photos, reports, and interview transcripts, are available to any member of the public subject to Florida’s Public Records Law; find details on making a request on the State Attorney’s Office Public Records page.

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that we cannot refute the assertion by the victim that he acted in lawful self-defense in the use of deadly force against Terrance Larry on September 30, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with the victim’s assertion that he was trying to take back his own truck from Larry when Larry came outside and advanced on him, armed with two knives. There is no evidence to suggest that the victim was armed with any weapons. Larry began to swing the knife and fight with the victim. The victim grabbed Larry by the arm and it appears that Larry was stabbed in the neck, which resulted in his death. In reaching this conclusion, our office conducted an exhaustive review of all available evidence and applicable legal standards. These steps included but were not limited to:

• reviewing police reports
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls, radio communications, and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation. TPD investigators determined that on September 30, 2021, at around 9:19 p.m., law enforcement responded to calls about two men involved in a physical altercation. When they arrived, officers found Larry lying in the grass with a cut to the right side of his neck and his upper right arm. Larry was found with a silver pocketknife in his left hand and a hunting knife in an orange case near his right leg. Larry was taken to the hospital but later died from his injuries. The orange case for the hunting knife was covered with blood. An autopsy by the Hillsborough Medical Examiner’s Office later determined that Larry died as a result of the stab wound to his neck.

A witness (“Witness 1”) told investigators that she was hanging out with Larry in her apartment when someone started knocking on the door. She recognized the person as the victim because she was acquainted with him. When no one answered the door, the person began pounding louder on the door. Larry got up from a couch and went outside. After a minute, Witness 1 went outside to look for Larry and saw the victim pulling out of the driveway in his black truck. She then found Larry lying on the side of the building. She stated that Larry had been driving the victim’s truck earlier in the day.

Another witness (“Witness 2”) was across the street from the yard where the altercation took place. Witness 2 said she was sitting outside her home when she saw a person banging on Witness 1’s door. Larry eventually came outside and began to fight with the person. Witness 2 lost sight of the two, as her view was blocked by a building, but later saw the person who had been banging on the door leave in a black truck.

An additional witness (“Witness 3”) said that Larry and the victim were always hanging out together outside the home. On the day of the incident, Witness 3 saw them both arguing about keys. The victim was demanding keys from Larry. The two began to fight and then the victim left in a black truck. The truck was determined to belong to the victim.

None of the witnesses ever saw a knife or weapon in the hands of the victim. However, the witnesses stated that Larry was known to always carry a knife with him.

Law enforcement located the victim, and he provided an audio recorded interview that is consistent with the accounts of the various witnesses. The victim stated that Larry had taken his truck and keys for several days. He went over to Larry’s home to get his truck. He was knocking on the door, but no one would answer. He stated that as he continued to knock on the door, Larry opened the door and was holding a knife. Larry then advanced and attacked him with the knife as he fought back. The victim denied being armed with any knife or weapon. He stated that he pushed Larry’s arm and then saw him bleeding. He continued struggling and fighting but then withdrew as he was able to grab his keys. He stated he was in fear from the knife and fought back only with his hands.

The name of the victim is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence cannot refute the statements by the victim that he reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when he used deadly force. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012. Accordingly, under Florida law, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against the victim.

An initial release of materials related to this case is available at this link. These items illustrate the crime scene and key details of the case. Further documents related to the case, including additional photos, reports, and interview transcripts, are available to any member of the public subject to Florida’s Public Records Law; find details on making a request on the State Attorney’s Office Public Records page.