Category Archives: Use of Deadly Force Reviews

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.

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that we cannot refute the assertion by Elliott Sonny Merced that he and another man (“Victim 1”) acted in lawful self-defense in the use of deadly force against 34-year-old Willys Ramon Perez on February 24, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with Merced’s assertion that he and Victim 1 shot at Perez only after Perez shot and seriously wounded Victim 1. 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, radio communications, and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and representatives from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators responding to the incident scene found Willys Ramon Perez dead in the parking lot of the Stop ‘N Pick convenience store at the southwest corner of Chapin St. and N. 22nd St. in Tampa. He was laying on his back with a gunshot wound to his head and a .45 caliber semi-automatic pistol in his right hand.

Victim 1 and his family live nearby. While standing outside his home on the afternoon of this incident, Victim 1 observed a blue sedan parked in the convenience store parking lot. He believed the vehicle belonged to a person with whom he had a confrontation a few days earlier. Victim 1 walked to the convenience store to confront the vehicle’s owner. Once Victim 1 got to the intersection of Chapin St. and 22nd St., he gestured for Merced to follow him. Merced complied.

Victim 1 approached Perez and the two men exchanged words. The convenience store’s external security video recorded only fragments of the interaction that followed between Victim 1 and Perez. Perez pulled out his pistol and fired three gunshots at Victim 1, who was standing in the road on Chapin St. Perez’s gunshots struck Victim 1 in the right elbow and right hip, causing him to fall to the ground and drop his own firearm. Merced was standing a few feet east of the intersection when he heard the gunshots and saw Victim 1 fall to the ground. Merced immediately pulled out his own semi-automatic pistol and fired sixteen shots in the direction of Perez. One of these gunshots struck Perez in the head, and Perez immediately fell to the ground near his blue sedan. Seconds later, Victim 1 stumbled and limped to the intersection, pointed his firearm toward the convenience store parking lot, and fired three gunshots.

Crime scene investigators found three spent .45 caliber bullet casings on the parking lot pavement a few feet from Perez’s body. Preliminary testing conducted by the Tampa Police Department determined that these three casings matched the gun found in the right hand of Mr. Perez. This corroborates the statements of Merced and Victim 1 that Perez fired his pistol at Victim 1 from this location.

Crime scene investigators collected 19 spent shell casings at or near the intersection of Chapin St. and N. 22nd St. During the execution of a search warrant at the residence of Victim 1, investigators located a 9 mm Beretta brand semi-automatic pistol in Victim 1’s bedroom. This firearm was missing three bullets from its magazine when it was recovered. Three of the spent casings collected from near the intersection were identified as having been fired from Victim 1’s Beretta. The remaining sixteen spent shell casings found at or near the intersection were identified as belonging to a 9 mm semi-automatic pistol owned by Merced.

One witness at the convenience store told investigators that Victim 1 initiated the exchange of gunfire with Perez as he spoke to the decedent from the roadway near the convenience store parking lot. However, the absence of any 9 mm shell casings at this location refutes this witness’s account. Victim 1’s three spent shell casings were found more than forty yards from Perez’s body.

An autopsy conducted by the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office revealed that Perez died from a single gunshot wound to the head.

The name of Victim 1 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 assertion by Merced that he and Victim 1 reasonably believed they were in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm when they used deadly force. These findings satisfy Florida Statute 776.012. Accordingly, under Florida law, there is no legal basis for criminal charges against Elliot Sonny Merced or 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 29-year-old Nickolas Earl Rogers AKA “Mystic” on February 10, 2021. Our review determined that the evidence is consistent with the victim’s assertion of self-defense. 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, relevant audio, and text communications
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Hillsborough County Sheriff’s Office conducted the investigation. Investigators found that on February 10, 2021, the victim and Rogers were involved in a conversation. During the conversation, Rogers became aggressive, retrieved a knife, and attempted to attack the victim with the knife. In response, the victim retreated, retrieved his firearm, and shot Rogers. Rogers sustained a single gunshot wound to the head, perforating the skull and brain. The toxicology report indicates Rogers had methamphetamines in his system. Rogers died at the scene, and a knife was found near his body. The victim told the police he shot Rogers to avoid being “shanked.”

The name of the victim is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law, as he is a victim of an aggravated assault by Rogers.

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.

Following an extensive review, our office has concluded that the victim of an aggravated assault and aggravated battery acted in lawful self-defense and was justified in his use of deadly force against 22-year-old Emmanuel White on February 21, 2021. Our review determined that White aggressively approached the victim in a vacant lot, threatened to fight him, pulled out a firearm and fired an errant shot at the victim’s head. The victim tackled White to the ground where a struggle ensued. White shot the victim in the thigh during the short struggle. The victim was able to wrestle the gun away from White and fatally shoot 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, radio communications, and relevant audio
• analyzing autopsy results
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and representatives from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Investigators found that at the time of the incident the victim had known Emmanuel White for several years. According to the victim, there was no known animosity between the two men. In fact, the victim considered White’s brother to be his friend. The victim knew White always carried multiple firearms and had heard that White was responsible for a number of recent shootings in the neighborhood.

At approximately 5 p.m. on February 21, 2021, the victim was rolling a blunt while sitting in the driver’s seat of a car, which was parked in a vacant lot near the intersection of East 27th Avenue and North 32nd Street in Tampa. A sedan pulled up and stopped directly in front of the victim’s parked vehicle. White exited the front passenger door of the sedan, immediately approached the victim’s vehicle, and instructed the victim to “[t]ighten up, get out of the car.” The victim stepped out of his car, prompting White to take a boxer’s stance and invite the victim to fight.

When the victim refused to fight him, White told the victim, “That’s fine, I’m gonna kill your ass.” White then pulled out a semi-automatic pistol, pointed it at the victim’s head and fired one errant gunshot. Once this gunshot missed him, the victim tackled White. During the initial struggle on the ground, White shot the victim once in the thigh. The victim was able to take the gun away from White as the two men wrestled on the ground. Fearing for his life and expecting White to possess at least one more gun, the victim fired several shots at White immediately after the two men got up from the ground. Seven of these shots struck White in the buttocks, back, and neck. White died at the scene. The victim handed the semi-automatic pistol to a bystander, got into his car, and drove himself to a nearby hospital.

White’s gun never has been recovered. No additional firearm was found on or near White’s body at the scene. Investigators found nine spent 9 mm shell casings at the incident scene. The number and location of these shell casings are consistent with the victim’s account of the incident. Following an autopsy conducted on the body of Emmanuel White, the Hillsborough County Medical Examiner’s Office determined that the multiple gunshot wounds suffered by White caused his death.

A bystander, who had tried to stand between White and the victim on White’s initial approach, confirmed that White had pointed a gun at the victim’s head. However, the bystander did not recall having heard the sound of the gunshot fired by White at the victim’s head.

Exterior security video from a nearby residence captured the entire incident. This video recording corroborates the victim’s account. A review of this video reveals that only nineteen seconds elapsed from the time White fired a shot at the victim’s head to the time that the victim fatally shot White with his own gun.

The name of the victim is being withheld due to Marsy’s Law, as he is the victim of an aggravated assault and an aggravated battery by Emmanuel White.

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.

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 will not pursue charges against anyone involved in an encounter on March 17, 2021 between Isaac Denmark, Jr. and two officers from the Tampa Police Department. During the encounter, the officer fired four shots that missed Denmark, before Denmark then laid down and surrendered. As outlined below, the officers reasonably believed they were under threat of death or great bodily harm when Denmark turned toward them while holding a weapon—making the officer’s use of force justified under Florida law. Additionally, the evidence is insufficient to establish criminal intent—that Denmark specifically intended to threaten the officers, which led to the officer firing—thus there is no legal basis to charge Denmark with aggravated assault.

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
• examining physical evidence
• reviewing video evidence, including footage from body worn cameras
• reviewing photographic evidence
• reviewing relevant audio
• applying the applicable laws

The Tampa Police Department conducted the investigation, and representatives from the State Attorney’s Office responded to the scene. Tampa Police Department investigators found that on the night of March 17, 2021, 57-year-old Isaac Denmark, Jr., who is homeless, was walking away from a park where he had been using a pellet gun equipped with a scope to shoot BBs at cans and squirrels. By his own account, Denmark had smoked marijuana and had drunk twelve sixteen-ounce beers throughout the day.

The officer was driving a marked patrol car when he and his partner, who was riding in the same car, observed Denmark walking southbound along N. 22nd Street near E. Hamilton Avenue carrying what appeared to be a rifle. The officer stopped his car approximately thirty yards behind Denmark. The officer put the car in park and unholstered his weapon as he exited the vehicle. As he stepped out of the car, he commanded Denmark to “Drop the rifle!” twice in rapid succession. Denmark turned around and faced the patrol car, at which point the officer fired four shots at Denmark. None of the officer’s gunshots struck Denmark, who then dropped the weapon, got down on the ground, and called out to the officers to “Calm down! It’s a BB gun!” The officer approached Denmark and ordered him to stay away from the dropped rifle as well as a knife that was near Denmark’s hand, then moved in and handcuffed Denmark.

Both officers said that Denmark had raised the gun and pointed it towards them as Denmark turned around. The entire exchange—from the car being shifted into park to the last of the four gunshots—took five seconds, based on what was recorded on the officer’s body-worn camera.

Interviewed separately, the officer’s partner said she also saw Denmark point the rifle towards them and that when she heard gunshots, at first she thought they had been fired by Denmark. During the incident, she drew her gun but did not fire.

Video from the body-worn cameras of the two officers does not capture Denmark’s location or actions before or during the gunfire. The video corroborates the officers’ accounts of their own commands and actions. It shows that one second elapsed between the end of the officer’s first command to drop the rifle and when he opened fire.

Denmark denied pointing the pellet gun at the officers but acknowledged that the officers could have reasonably perceived that he did so based on how he turned towards them.

Investigators interviewed nearby residents. No independent witness could be located who had witnessed the initial encounter and gunfire. A civilian witness responded to the scene and told investigators that he had been with Denmark earlier at the park. This witness revealed that he had warned Denmark not to carry the pellet rifle with him that night.

An independent witness said that she had seen Denmark walking down the street earlier, carrying the rifle by holding it in the middle of the stock, at his hip, parallel to the ground, with his hand near the trigger.

Four spent 9 millimeter shell casings were found at the incident scene. Testing conducted by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement laboratory verified that these four spent casings were fired from the officer’s weapon.

The names of the officers are being withheld under the provisions of Marsy’s Law, as reflected in 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 officer reasonably believed he was in fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to himself and his partner 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.

Our office originally filed two charges of aggravated assault against Isaac Denmark, Jr. Following a full review of the case and information gathered since the incident, however, we lack sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant “intentionally and unlawfully threatened… to do violence to the victim,” which is required for an aggravated assault conviction. Accordingly, we have dismissed the charges against Denmark.

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.