All posts by Erin Maloney

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that a 16-year-old male victim acted in lawful self-defense and was justified in his use of deadly force against a 15-year-old male (“Juvenile 1”) on August 6, 2021. Our review determined that the victim was attacked by a group of individuals while he was walking home alone. The victim had a prior conflict with this group. As three individuals approached the victim, one of them swung his fist at the victim. The victim had a pocketknife and swung back with the knife. Juvenile 1 then approached the victim and attempted to swing his fist. The victim swung the knife and struck Juvenile 1 in the neck area, which ultimately caused his death. The victim retreated and one of the individuals in the group retrieved a firearm and shot at least once in the direction of the victim. 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 and the investigation of the Tampa Police Department
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video surveillance evidence that included audio of the event
• reviewing photographic evidence
• analyzing autopsy results
• reviewing social media posts and photographs
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation. Investigators determined that the victim was walking alone on the sidewalk along Sligh Ave. at 3:05 a.m. on August 6, 2021. The victim heard a vehicle pull up behind him and noticed the vehicle driving the wrong way on the road. The vehicle stopped immediately beside the victim on the roadway. Three individuals exited the back seat of the vehicle. The victim immediately recognized two male subjects, Juvenile 1 and another male, and felt they were about to initiate a physical fight with him based on prior encounters.  The victim armed himself with a knife he was carrying in his pocket. As one of the individuals approached and swung his fist, the victim swung his knife, cutting the attacker. At that time Juvenile 1 came toward the victim and swung his fist. The victim swung the knife, cutting Juvenile 1 on the neck. The victim then ran away from the incident. As the victim ran away, someone from the vehicle armed themselves with a handgun and fired toward the victim. Juvenile 1 was taken to the hospital by the other individuals where he was pronounced deceased by hospital staff.

Two video surveillance clips were located from nearby businesses. The first video showed the vehicle which carried Juvenile 1 making a U-turn upon seeing the victim on the sidewalk. The other individuals in the vehicle confirmed that the vehicle made the maneuver to confront and fight the victim. Another video captured the vehicle stopping near the victim. This video also had audio and voices can be heard yelling and arguing. The video did not capture the actual fight but did confirm that after Juvenile 1 yelled that he was bleeding the victim ran away from the incident. The video and audio also captured one of the individuals firing a gun toward the victim as he ran away.

Through the investigation it was learned that the individuals that attacked the victim had an ongoing dispute and had previously tried to fight the victim. One week prior to this incident, the individuals, including Juvenile 1, sent the victim a photograph posing on the victim’s porch, without his knowledge, with a firearm. The picture had a caption that read, “Brining Smoke to Ya Front Door Son Son.” This prior incident gave the victim a reasonable belief that he was going to be attacked when the individuals surprised him the morning of August 6. Witnesses confirmed that the individuals had an ongoing dispute with the victim and they had attempted to physically fight him in the past.

Three of the individuals in the vehicle gave interviews to law enforcement. Two of the individuals gave initial false statements to law enforcement about the location of the incident. They later changed their story and provided accounts of what occurred. They confirmed that the vehicle stopped so they could fight the victim. They also confirmed that someone fired a gun toward the victim as he ran away.

One shell casing was recovered from the scene. However, no firearm was recovered. The knife used by the victim was never recovered. The victim stated he left the knife at a friend’s house after the incident.

The Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office found that Juvenile 1 died because of a stab wound to the neck/chest area with perforation to the right jugular vein.

The name of the victim is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law, as he is the victim of an aggravated assault by the deceased and the other individuals. The names of the other individuals are being withheld because they are under the age of 18.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence of this incident prove that the victim 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.

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 involve juvenile offenders. Under Fla. Statute 985.04, evidence in juvenile criminal matters is exempt from release. 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 an officer from the Tampa Police Department was justified when he employed deadly force against a 17-year-old male juvenile (“Juvenile 1”) on August 19, 2021. Our review determined that the officer was operating in plain clothes in a covert vehicle and conducting surveillance on Juvenile 1, who matched the description of a wanted suspect. After circling Juvenile 1 multiple times, the officer saw Juvenile 1 watching him and holding a handgun. As other police units moved in to make contact with Juvenile 1, the officer drove toward Juvenile 1. As he did, Juvenile 1 again pulled out a gun, this time raising it in the officer’s direction. The officer fired his service weapon rapidly eight times through his front windshield. Juvenile 1 was not hit and fled on his bicycle. Other police units located Juvenile 1 nearby and as they moved in to arrest him, he spontaneously stated, “I dumped the gun.” A loaded 9mm pistol was found along the path Juvenile 1 had taken while fleeing on his bike. 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:

• Responding to the scene following the shooting
• reviewing interviews of the involved law enforcement officers
• reviewing interviews of the detained suspect
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing relevant audio
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and a representative from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators determined that on August 19, 2021, the officer was operating in a plain clothes capacity in an unmarked covert vehicle. The officer observed Juvenile 1 on a bicycle in the area of North Nebraska and East Linebaugh Avenues. He further observed that Juvenile 1 generally matched the description of a wanted suspect, although it was later determined that Juvenile 1 was not that subject. The officer conducted surveillance on Juvenile 1 by circling back in his vehicle multiple times and observed Juvenile 1 to be watching him and holding a handgun.

The officer maintained radio contact with other units of his squad while waiting for them to converge on the area. As the other units arrived, the officer drove toward Juvenile 1. As he did so, Juvenile 1 again produced the firearm and raised it in the officer’s direction. In response, the officer fired his service weapon eight times through the front windshield of his covert vehicle at Juvenile 1. Juvenile 1 was not struck. Although he raised his gun in the officer’s direction, Juvenile 1 did not fire his weapon. Juvenile 1 fled on his bicycle and was apprehended a short distance away by other members of the officer’s squad. An EAA Witness 9mm handgun was located, discarded along Juvenile 1’s path of flight. There was one round in the chamber and six in the magazine.

The officer’s account is corroborated by another member the officer’s unit who was in a position to observe Juvenile 1 raise his arm toward the officer immediately before the officer discharged his weapon.

A portion of this incident was recorded by the officer’s body-worn camera. Because the officer was seated in his vehicle, the video is largely obstructed by the dashboard; it shows momentary glimpses of Juvenile 1, but no specific actions by Juvenile 1 are visible. The apprehension of Juvenile 1 was captured by other officers’ body-worn cameras. Prosecutors were also able to review surveillance video from nearby commercial properties which did not capture the actual shooting.

Juvenile 1 was unharmed and has been charged as a juvenile with carrying a concealed firearm (Florida Statute 790.01(2)) and minor in possession of a firearm (Florida Statutes 790.22(3) and (5)(a)).

The officer was armed with a SIG Sauer P320 9mm handgun. Based on an examination of that firearm and video evidence, investigators determined that eight rounds were fired during this incident.

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

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence support the conclusion that the officer was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when he employed deadly force against Juvenile 1. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012 and 776.05 and the use of deadly force by the officer was justified. Accordingly, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against the officer.

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 and ongoing juvenile criminal case. Under Fla. Statute 985.04, evidence in pending juvenile cases 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 an officer from the Tampa Police Department was justified when he employed deadly force against 22-year-old Samario Lee Austin on August 16, 2021. The officer was responding to an active shooter in a Downtown Tampa apartment complex and located Austin, who was armed with both a handgun and AR-style rifle. Austin had already fired multiple gunshots and members of the public were clearly in danger. The officer fired seven shots at Austin with his handgun. Austin was not hit and retreated; he was taken into custody soon afterward. 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
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls and relevant audio
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation. Investigators found that on August 16, 2021, Tampa Police Communications received a large volume of 911 calls about shots fired at Metro 510 Apartments in Downtown Tampa. Callers described the shooter as a shirtless African-American man armed with some type of rifle.

A Tampa Police officer, who was off duty and nearby at the time, heard what he initially believed may have been fireworks. The officer equipped himself with a handgun and went to investigate. Based on his training and experience, he soon identified the noises as gunfire. He then donned his ballistic vest and full duty belt with service pistol. He attempted to call 911 but the call did not go through, so he used his portable police radio to contact Tampa Police Department dispatch.

From a third-floor courtyard area of the complex, the officer heard two additional shots accompanied by some yelling. He then spotted Samario Lee Austin in black shorts with no shirt holding both a rifle and a handgun. Austin was walking backwards along a fifth-floor walkway that looked down into the courtyard. Austin was across the courtyard and two stories above the officer. Believing Austin had both a tactical and firepower advantage, the officer fired seven rounds at Austin without announcing himself. Austin, who was not struck, retreated out of the officer’s view.

The officer maintained cover and contact with Tampa Police and soon joined arriving units’ efforts to locate Austin. Ultimately, Austin was located and taken into custody without incident.

Witness statements and 911 calls are consistent with the officer’s account of events.

A portion of this incident was captured via cell phone video from a civilian in a nearby building. The apprehension of Austin was captured by officers’ body worn cameras.

Officers recovered a Glock 26 9mm handgun and a .22 caliber AR-style weapon discarded in a stairwell between the fifth and sixth floors. Investigators later located seventeen spent .22 caliber shell casings and nine spent 9mm shell casings from the fifth and sixth floors. Several projectiles were also located. Shell casings from a test fire of the .22 and 9mm weapons are a presumptive match for the recovered casings.

Austin was unharmed and has been charged by prosecutors with two counts of shooting at, within, or into a building (Florida Statute 790.19), one count of aggravated assault (Florida Statute 784.021(1)(a)), and one count of culpable negligence by exposure to injury (Florida Statute 784.05(1)).

The officer was armed with a SIG Sauer P320 9mm handgun. A total of seven spent shell casings were recovered from the location where the officer fired at Austin. Investigators observed seven apparent bullet strikes on the wall toward which the officer was shooting. This is also consistent with the amount of remaining ammunition in the officer’s gun after the incident.

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 support the conclusion that the officer was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or others when he employed deadly force against Samario Lee Austin. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012 and 776.05 and the use of deadly force by the officer was justified. Accordingly, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against the officer.

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 an officer of the Tampa Police Department was justified in his use of deadly force against 40-year-old John Reuben Turbe, Jr. on July 4, 2021. Our review determined that when the officer made contact with Turbe, Turbe turned toward the officer and pulled a firearm from his waist area. The officer shouted several commands to put the gun down. After a short foot pursuit, Turbe turned toward the officer and took several steps toward him. Turbe then raised his arm and pointed his gun at the officer. The officer fired his weapon four times, striking Turbe, who died as a result of the gunshot wounds. 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:

• responding to the scene following the shooting
• reviewing interviews of civilian witnesses
• reviewing interviews of the involved law enforcement officers
• reviewing interviews of involved medical personnel
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence, including officer body worn cameras and surveillance camera footage
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 audio and TPD radio transmissions
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) conducted the investigation, and a representative from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. FDLE investigators found Turbe entered the Texaco Nas Mart at 10 p.m. on July 4, 2021. An employee observed Turbe approach the register and remove a black pistol from his left waist area and move it to his right waist area. Turbe exited the store and walked northwest toward three people. Turbe fired one round from the pistol, walked back toward store, and fired two additional shots into the air. The store employee called 911.

The officer was dispatched to the Texaco Nas Mart and arrived at 10:13 p.m. His response to the scene is captured clearly on his body-worn camera. He spoke with the store employee, who told the officer the suspect was close by and directed the officer toward the suspect. The officer walked out of the store and saw Turbe walking near the southeast corner of the gas station. Turbe turned toward the officer and pulled a pistol from this waist area. The officer immediately ordered Turbe to put down the gun. Turbe did not comply.

Instead, Turbe ran away from the officer and into a nearby neighborhood. Turbe ran south along the edge of Temple Street, still holding the same gun that he had fired into the air a few minutes earlier. The officer pursued Turbe, continuing to warn him to drop the gun, shouting, “Put the gun down! Put it down now! You’re gonna get shot!” and other similar warnings. After running for 20 seconds, Turbe stopped and turned around to face the officer. Turbe took five steps toward the officer, raised his arm, and pointed the gun at the officer. The officer fired his service weapon four times in quick succession from 15 feet away. Turbe fell to the ground.

The officer secured Turbe’s handgun. Another officer arrived immediately after the shooting and attempted life saving measures. An examination of Turbe’s gun showed that a live round was wedged in the top of the pistol’s slide (a position called “stove-piped”), which would have kept the gun from firing until that round was cleared.

FDLE was able to obtain surveillance video from the Texaco Nas Mart. The video depicts Turbe firing a firearm into the air on the property. FDLE agents located residential surveillance videos that captured a portion of the foot pursuit before the shooting. All involved officers, including the officer who fired at Turbe, were wearing a body-worn cameras. The entire shooting incident was recorded and is consistent with witness statements.

Several civilian witnesses gave statements to FDLE agents describing what they saw leading up to the shooting. Four of the witnesses saw Turbe with a black pistol and three of them observed him fire the weapon in the air two or three times. Several witnesses heard the officer yelling at Turbe to put down the gun. They did not see the officer-involved shooting itself, but two witnesses did hear three to four shots fired after the officer yelled. This is consistent with the video surveillance and body-worn camera recording.

The officer was carrying a Tampa Police Department-owned SIG Sauer Model P320 9mm handgun. When FDLE agents took custody of the officer’s firearm, it had thirteen rounds in the magazine and one in the chamber. Body-worn camera video shows the officer firing four rounds. Four 9mm caliber cartridge casings were recovered in the area where the officer fired his service weapon. Three .40 caliber cartridge casings were recovered in the parking lot of the Texaco Nas Mart, matching the caliber of Turbe’s handgun. The firearm evidence at the scene is consistent with the store surveillance video, body-worn camera footage, and witness statements.

The decedent’s autopsy was performed by the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office. Gunshot wounds were identified on the decedent’s left leg above the knee, chest above the right nipple, face to the left of the nose, and right earlobe. In addition, one of the rounds, or a piece of a round, struck the tip of Turbe’s right index finger—likely before that round then entered his body in one of the four areas listed above. The projectile that entered the chest travelled through the lungs and lodged in the back near the spine. The medical examiner was able to recover the projectile that entered through the face and lodged in the back of the skull. The cause of death was determined to be gunshot wounds to the head and torso penetrating the brain and skull and perforating the lung. Additionally, the Medical Examiner’s Office performed toxicology testing and detected ethanol and THC in the decedent’s peripheral blood.

The name of the law enforcement officer involved 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 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 officer.

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 an assertion by a 31-year-old victim that he acted in lawful self-defense in the use of deadly force against 30-year-old Christopher Hoke on December 28, 2020. Our review determined that Hoke and the victim had ongoing issues stemming from conflicts over children and romantic relationships. On the night of the incident, Hoke was part of a large group of people who had surrounded and started causing destruction to a mobile home with the victim, his girlfriend, and her five children inside. At least one member of the group was armed with a gun and another was armed with a baseball bat. After a person in the mob shoved the victim to the ground, the victim stood up and fired one shot at Hoke, killing him. The evidence is consistent with the conclusion that the victim was in fear for his own safety, as well as that of his girlfriend and her five children, when he shot Hoke. 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 photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation. Investigators found that on December 28, 2020, at about 10:22 p.m., Christopher Hoke went to a mobile home in the Glades Mobile Home Park at 1100 E. 127th Avenue in Tampa. Hoke was there to pick up a child who is the daughter of his ex-girlfriend, Mya French. French’s new boyfriend—who is the victim—was the resident of the mobile home. The victim, French, and her five children were inside the home at the time. French and the victim refused to let the child leave with Hoke. Hoke gathered several family members at the mobile home. At least one member of the group was armed with a gun and another was armed with a baseball bat.

Hoke left the area but returned a short time later and joined the crowd in the front yard of the victim’s home. The victim came to the door of his home holding a silver revolver. The large group began arguing with the victim, challenging him to put down the gun and come out and fight. The mob began breaking out the mobile home’s windows. According to an independent witness, an unknown man in the crowd shoved the victim in the front doorway, knocking the victim backward onto the floor of his home. The victim got up and picked up the gun he had dropped when he was pushed. He pointed his gun at Hoke and fired a single shot, striking Hoke in the neck and killing him. When first responders arrived, they found a different gun—a light blue semiautomatic handgun—on the ground near Hoke.

Various potential witnesses have either declined to come forward, provided inconsistent statements, or simply refused to cooperate. However, the available independent witness statements and the physical evidence are all consistent with the victim’s account of the incident.

Investigators located the victim’s silver Rossi .38 special revolver and a large amount of ammunition hidden inside a wall in the mobile home. One of the five rounds of ammunition loaded in the gun had been fired, which is consistent with what witnesses saw during the incident. The firearm found next to Hoke was a “Tiffany Blue” colored Walther PK380. This gun did not appear to have been fired; it had eight live rounds inside when deputies located and secured it.

The Hillsborough Medical Examiner’s Office performed an autopsy on Hoke. The single round entered his body at the base of his neck, traveling slightly downward. This trajectory is consistent with statements from witnesses. The autopsy determined the bullet perforated the subclavian artery and lung, causing Hoke’s death.

The name of the victim is being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence cannot refute that the victim reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or others 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 23-year-old Jose Antonio Santos, Jr. (aka “Jo-Jo”) on January 10, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with the victim’s assertion that four masked men—including Santos—approached the victim’s car and tapped on the window where the victim was sitting. Several of the masked men then opened fire at the car and the people inside, which is supported by shell casings and bullet holes found at the scene. The victim had a handgun in the car and, in fear for his life, he returned fire. The victim shot twice, with one of the rounds hitting and killing Santos. 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 photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls, radio communications, and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

HCSO conducted the investigation. Investigators found the car with bullet holes in the driver’s side when they arrived at the scene at 5605 Gibson Avenue in North Tampa. The shooting had taken place after dark, at approximately 10:20 p.m. Deputies located and spoke to the victim as well as other witnesses who saw the masked men, including Santos, approach the car and open fire.

Despite being wounded, Santos had attempted to flee the scene after the shooting. He left one sneaker behind. Video evidence revealed Santos was dropped off at AdventHealth Tampa on Fletcher Avenue at about 11:04 p.m. He died at the hospital and a shoe matching the one at the scene was collected from him that night. The shoe at the scene was tested by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and Santos’ DNA was on the shoe.

A total of 11 shell casings were recovered at the scene. Two shell casings were recovered inside the car where the victim was sitting, which is consistent with the victim’s statement that he shot twice from inside the car. The remaining nine casings were located outside the car. The car had multiple gunshot strikes with trajectories coming from outside. All casings were sent to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. The two casings from inside the car were fired from the gun the victim had in the car. The remaining nine casings were .380 caliber and 9mm casings; these casings were consistent with one another, but no firearms were recovered with which to compare them.

Santos died of a single gunshot wound to the heart. Multiple witness corroborated the victim’s account of the events. Another witness in the car at the time the victim returned fire stated that he and the victim were both in fear of being killed when the masked men opened fire on their car.

The name of the victim is being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

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 to himself and others 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 38-year-old Lee Davis on April 23, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with the victim’s assertion that Lee Davis—without provocation—opened fire with a pistol, shooting at a vehicle that carried the victim as a passenger. The victim asserts that he then returned fire in defense of himself and his brother, who was driving the car. Video footage shows Davis sitting in his own car for several minutes, then exiting and walking towards the victim’s car while carrying an object in his hands that appears to be a gun. Physical evidence and witness testimony establish that the object was a gun, and that Davis then fired several times at the two people in the car, prompting the victim to return fire. 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 photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation. Investigators found that prior to the shooting, the victim’s and Lee Davis’s cars were parked on East Lake Avenue a short distance from each other. Davis was seen on video getting into his car and sitting in the driver’s seat for several minutes before exiting and immediately walking back toward the victim’s car. As Davis walked in the direction of the victim’s car, a shiny object could be seen in his hand. As he approached the victim’s car, Davis—without provocation—opened fire with a pistol, shooting into the victim’s car. The victim’s car then accelerated across Lake Avenue and crashed into a tree. The victim returned fire from the passenger side of the car in defense of himself and his brother, who was driving the car. Davis was struck by the gunfire. The victim, still in fear for his life, then ran from the scene on foot.

Store security video from just east of the scene depicted these events, including Davis walking to his car and sitting in the driver’s seat, Davis then exiting his car and walking back toward the victim’s car with an object in his hands, the victim’s car accelerating across Lake Avenue, the crash, the shots being fired, and the victim fleeing on foot. Additionally, Shot Spotter microphones recorded two volleys of gunshots being fired at the time of the incident.

The on-scene investigation yielded a total of 10 shell casings—seven .40 caliber casings and three 9mm casings—which were found on the street on Lake Avenue near the crash scene. The shell casings were found in distinct clusters, with each caliber grouped together on opposite sides of the crash scene. Additionally, damage located on the victim’s car was consistent with rounds being fired toward the passenger compartment and into the car and with rounds being fired from the passenger side of the car.

An autopsy examination was performed on the body of Davis at the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office. The examination revealed that Davis died from a gunshot wound to the torso with perforations of the heart and right lung. A projectile was recovered from Davis’s body, which was a .38 caliber class bullet. The .38 caliber class of projectiles includes 9mm caliber projectiles.

The name of the victim is being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

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 to himself and others 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 a male victim acted in lawful self-defense and was justified in his use of deadly force against 24-year-old Bishop Nathaniel on March 20, 2021. Our review determined that the victim was working as a licensed armed security guard at Flow Hookah Lounge at 2312 W. Waters Avenue just after 6 a.m. During an altercation between two groups of people outside the business, the victim watched Nathaniel arm himself and run in a low crouch toward the crowd. The victim gave multiple warnings, but Nathaniel proceeded to fire three gunshots. In response, the victim fired five shots at Nathaniel, killing him. 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:

• responding to the scene following the shooting
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and a representative from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators found that the victim was working at the front door with other armed security officers. Among the patrons inside were two groups of friends. There was a disturbance between two groups inside, but no one was ejected.

Nathaniel—who was a member of one of the groups—exited the club, walked across the parking lot, then returned wearing a fanny pack diagonally across his chest. Nathaniel stood with two friends near the hookah lounge front door. The two friends then went to retrieve items from the trunk of a car and placed them into their waistbands.

One of the two friends started a fistfight with the members of the second group as they exited the club. The victim walked out into the parking lot along with other security officers and was concerned that Nathaniel was armed.

The victim watched Nathaniel arm himself and run in a low crouch toward the crowd. The victim unholstered his firearm and began yelling commands to the gunman to drop the gun. Nathaniel fired three gunshots. The victim did not know the direction the gunman was firing—at him or at the crowd—and immediately was afraid for his own life and for the lives of others around him. The gunman turned toward the victim, and the victim fired five rounds at Nathaniel. Nathaniel fell to the ground and the victim stopped firing.

Other security staff approached Nathaniel and saw a black semiautomatic firearm lying on the ground next to him. Other officers performed CPR until police officers arrived. Nathaniel’s two friends fled the scene and were later located.

Surveillance video from the business and accounts from other staff members corroborate the victim’s description of events. Shell casings located at the scene match the two firearms used in the incident, with three shots fired by Nathaniel and five shots by the victim. Nathaniel had an additional fully loaded magazine in his fanny pack.

The Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office performed an autopsy on Nathaniel, with findings consistent with the victim’s account of events. Nathaniel sustained four projectile strikes to his body, all from left-to-right, to his center chest (perforating his left lung, heart, aorta, and right lung), left hip, left back, and right thigh.

The name of the victim is being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence of this incident prove that the victim reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself and others 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 Tyree Harris acted in lawful defense of others and was justified in his use of deadly force against 25-year-old Delamitre Assante West on March 18, 2021. Our review determined that Tyree Harris was an authorized guest in the home of West’s ex-girlfriend when West forcibly and unlawfully entered the home and battered his ex-girlfriend and another woman. Harris shot West while West was committing a forcible felony—burglary of a dwelling with a battery—and Harris reasonably believed West’s ex-girlfriend was in serious danger. 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:

• responding to the scene following the shooting
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing 911 calls and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation, and a representative from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators found that in 2017, Delamitre West began a relationship with the female resident of the Ruskin home where this incident took place. The relationship was volatile and marked by frequent incidents of domestic violence committed by West upon his girlfriend.

West was arrested on unrelated felony warrants and incarcerated in the Hillsborough County Jail in November 2020. His girlfriend ended the relationship while West was incarcerated.  At some point in early 2021, West’s ex-girlfriend began a relationship with Tyree Harris. The woman shared a two-bedroom Ruskin residence with another woman. Harris was a frequent overnight guest of West’s ex-girlfriend.

West was released from county jail on bond two days before this incident. West was required to wear a GPS tracking monitor on his ankle as a condition of his release. West’s ex-girlfriend feared for her safety upon learning of West’s release from jail. On the morning of March 18, 2021, the woman refused a request from West’s sister to allow West to pick up his personal items from her home. She instead gave those items to West’s sister that morning. Later that morning, West’s nephew drove West to his ex-girlfriend’s house, ostensibly to pick up his personal belongings.  The nephew waited in the car as West banged on the front door. Tyree Harris, who had spent the previous night at the residence as the invited guest of West’s ex-girlfriend, remained in a back bedroom as West’s ex-girlfriend stepped out of the house to speak to West.

After spending a few moments unsuccessfully attempting to convince his ex-girlfriend to resume their relationship, West pushed her against the front door and forced his way into the residence. He entered the front room of the home where he pushed his ex-girlfriend to the ground and pushed the co-tenant onto a couch when the co-tenant tried to intercede. The women screamed at West to stop. West’s nephew saw West forcibly enter the house and immediately heard sounds that indicated to the nephew that West was assaulting his ex-girlfriend. The nephew exited the car and ran to the open doorway of the residence. He saw West restraining his ex-girlfriend with both arms wrapped around her waist.

Upon hearing the screams and aware of West’s past domestic violence, Harris exited the bedroom with a .40 caliber handgun. Harris yelled at West to stop, then fired multiple gunshots at West. West’s nephew was standing behind his uncle when Harris fired shots inside the home. West and his nephew immediately ran from the house. West was struck by two gunshots fired by Harris. West collapsed and died in the driveway of a house across the street from the incident scene. One errant gunshot struck West’s nephew in the shoulder. He was transported to a nearby hospital by a relative and survived this injury.

Harris cooperated with the Sheriff’s Office investigators. In his recorded statement, Harris stated that he never had any prior contact or communication with West. He further stated that he only used deadly force to protect the residents of the home from West. According to Harris, he did not aim at West’s nephew, and did not intend to shoot him.

Investigators found the .40 caliber handgun used by Harris inside the home. The firearm’s magazine was empty. Four spent .40 caliber casings were collected from within the front room of the house. Outside, investigators found three additional casings on the ground a few feet from the front doorway.

The Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office conducted an autopsy on the body of Delamitre West. This autopsy determined that West suffered two fatal gunshot wounds: one to the lower right side of his neck and one to the lower left side of his back. The location of these wounds is consistent with the direction of gunfire described by Harris.

The names of Delamitre West’s ex-girlfriend and her co-tenant, as well as West’s nephew, are being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence of this incident prove that at the time Tyree Harris used deadly force against Delmitre West, Harris reasonably believed that West was committing a forcible act after having made an unlawful and forcible entry into the home of West’s ex-girlfriend. Under these circumstances, Florida law presumes that Harris held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or another person when he used deadly force. The unintentional shooting by Harris of West’s nephew, which occurred during Harris’ lawful use of deadly force against West, is excusable under the law. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012. Accordingly, under Florida law, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against Tyree Harris.

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 a male victim (“Victim 1”) that he acted in lawful self-defense in the use of deadly force against 31-year-old Keith Levalentino Clev Scott on December 21, 2020. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with Victim 1’s assertion that he fatally shot Scott as Scott pointed two loaded firearms at him. Scott was still clutching a semi-automatic pistol in his right hand when investigators found him dead on the sidewalk in front of Victim 1’s Tampa home. 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:

• responding to the scene following the shooting
• reviewing interviews of witnesses
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and a representative from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators found that shortly after 11:00 a.m., on December 21, 2021, Victim 1 was sitting on a chair on the front porch of his Tampa home. A 19-year-old friend of Victim 1, identified below as “Victim 2,” sat nearby on the bottom step leading up to the porch. Both men had guns with them. They observed a silver sedan drive by the house, stop in the street, and back up to a stationary position directly in front of Victim 1’s home.

Keith Scott, who was not known to either of the victims, jumped out from the driver’s side front door with a loaded pistol drawn. He approached Victim 2, who had stood up to face him. Scott took the pistol from Victim 2’s pocket and pointed the two guns at Victim 1 on the porch. Victim 1 used his own gun to fire six shots at Scott, striking Scott multiple times. One of Victim 1’s gunshots hit Victim 2, entering and exiting through Victim 2’s right shoulder. Keith Scott fell and died on the concrete sidewalk a few inches from the bottom step of the porch. Upon arriving at the scene, investigators found the driver’s side front door of Scott’s car open and the car running. His right hand still held a semi-automatic pistol, which had not been fired during the incident.

Another resident of Victim 1’s home viewed the incident through a window. This person’s account corroborated Victim 1’s version of Keith Scott’s threatening conduct. The location of the multiple gunshot wounds suffered by Scott, as revealed during an autopsy conducted the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office, is consistent with Victim 1’s account of the incident.

Investigators found six spent shell casings at the scene of the incident. Three were found on the porch and three were recovered from the porch steps. These shell casings were matched to a gun owned by Victim 1.

Victim 2’s firearm was found in a shed behind the house. He discarded the weapon as he fled from the scene. DNA from both Victim 2 and Keith Scott was found on the pistol grip of this weapon, further corroborating Victim 1’s assertion that Scott had pointed two guns at him during the incident—with one of the guns being the pistol Scott had grabbed from Victim 2’s pocket.

The names of the two victims are being withheld under the provisions of Article I, Section 16 (b) (5) of the Florida Constitution.

After our thorough analysis, we have determined that the facts and evidence cannot refute the statements by Victim 1 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 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.