Maria Fernanda Rico Andrade v. United States of America, et al., No 2:15-cv-00103 (S.D. Texas, filed Feb. 27, 2015)
On November 3, 2011, Gerardo Lozano Rico, an unarmed Mexican national, was driving along a rural road in Texas when his car was pulled over by two United States Border Patrol agents. After being pulled over, several passengers in Mr. Lozano’s car began to flee and the two Border Patrol officers attempted to apprehend them. After one agent smashed the driver’s side window of the car with a baton, Mr. Lozano attempted to drive away from them. In response, the two agents fired approximately 15 shots into the vehicle, killing Mr. Lozano. The two agents who fired the shots claimed that they had fired in self-defense because the vehicle was coming in their direction.
In June 2014, Maria Fernanda Rico Andrade, Mr. Lozano’s mother, filed an administrative complaint against the Border Patrol, which was denied in August 2014. On February 27, 2015, Ms. Rico filed a lawsuit in the District Court of Texas. The complaint alleges an unconstitutionally excessive use of force and a pattern and practice of border patrol agents who, by placing themselves in front of moving vehicles, intentionally expose themselves to additional risk which creates a justification for the use of deadly force. The complaint also alleges the fatal shots fired by the agents were from the side and the rear, occurring after the car had already passed them and making the decision to use force unreasonable.
On October 6, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On March 27, 2017, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment.
On July 12, 2017, the court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss on Plaintiff’s FTCA and Bivens claims and struck as moot Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. The court ruled that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the FTCA claims and that the statute of limitations on the FTCA and Bivens claims had run.
In August 2017, Plaintiff moved for reconsideration of the decision, which Defendants opposed. On September 18, 2017, the court denied Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration.
- Motion to Dismiss
- Motion for Summary Judgment
- Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss
- Defendants’ Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss
- Memorandum and Order on Motion to Dismiss
- Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration
- Plaintiff’s Memorandum in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
- Defendants’ Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration
- Plaintiff’s Reply in Support of Motion for Reconsideration
Counsel: Robert C. Hilliard | Singleton Law Firm, APC; Hilliard Munoz Gonzales, LLP
Contact: Robert C. Hilliard | email@example.com | (361) 882-1612