A federal judge has permanently dismissed the assault charge against Carlos Jimenez, the Ontario, California, man shot by an ICE officer during a vehicle stop in October 2025. Judge Kenly Kiya Kato dismissed the case with prejudice after Jimenez completed a diversion agreement, meaning prosecutors cannot bring the same charge again, the Orange County Register reported.
The charge arose from an encounter on Oct. 30, 2025. The government alleged Jimenez used his car to assault a federal officer; his lawyers have disputed that account. Jimenez completed diversion without admitting guilt, fault or wrongdoing, according to the East Bay Times. The dismissal ends the criminal case, but does not resolve the disputed accounts of the shooting.
The shooting account remains contested
The criminal complaint alleged that Jimenez argued with agents during the stop, then reversed toward a vehicle and an officer, who shot him in the right shoulder. Jimenez’s lawyers said he was trying to leave after being told to go and was shot from behind as he drove away. Jimenez told a judge he was making a three-point turn, the Orange County Register reported. These are competing accounts; the dismissal itself does not establish which is accurate.
The case also featured a dispute over records from the officers. Jimenez’s lawyers sought communications about the encounter, including messages from the officer they identified as Eusebio Ortiz. Prosecutors said those text messages did not exist and denied withholding them, while the defense questioned that response. In May 2026, Kato ordered the government to produce responsive records or have Ortiz provide a sworn declaration that none existed, according to the Los Angeles Times.
The records dispute did not produce a public finding about whether the messages existed. The parties agreed to pause the case, and the trial was postponed. Jimenez’s civil-rights lawyer, Greg Jackson, said he suspected prosecutors wanted to avoid further scrutiny of the officer’s phone and related testimony. Justice Department spokesperson Ciaran McEvoy said Jimenez requested diversion and the pause, and that prosecutors sought dismissal after he complied with the agreement, the Los Angeles Times reported. Those explanations differ; neither changes the terms of the final dismissal.
A civil claim is still unresolved
Jackson has filed a claim against the federal government for malicious prosecution and said he planned to bring a lawsuit alleging malicious prosecution and abuse of process. He has argued that the criminal case lacked probable cause and that agents misrepresented the encounter; those are the lawyer’s allegations, not findings in the dismissed criminal case. The San Gabriel Valley Tribune reported the claim and Jackson’s plans. Whether a civil suit will be filed and how it will be resolved remain unknown.
Two other cases offer limited comparisons, not proof of a broader trend. In Chicago, Border Patrol shot Marimar Martinez during a vehicle incident in October 2025; federal charges against her and Anthony Ian Santos Ruiz were dismissed with prejudice the following month, according to WTTW. In a separate South Los Angeles incident, federal agents shot Carlitos Ricardo Parias on Oct. 21, 2025. FOX 11 Los Angeles reported that a judge dismissed his indictment on Dec. 29, citing civil-rights violations and government procedural failures. The cases differ in agencies, circumstances and reasons for dismissal; they do not establish what happened in Jimenez’s encounter or predict the outcome of his civil claim.
