I’ve been doing these breakdowns based on 20 years of experience as a cop in Southern California — including investigating officer-involved shootings. I go where the evidence goes. Not where the narrative points.
This one comes out of San Marcos, San Diego County Sheriff’s Office. February 18 of this year. A passenger in a stopped vehicle pulled a gun on police. When you do that, this is what happens. Let’s break it down.
What Officers Knew Before Contact
A deputy stopped a red Hyundai Sonata for an inoperative taillight — a routine vehicle code stop. Two occupants: a 21-year-old woman driving and a 33-year-old man in the passenger seat.
During the stop, the deputy ran the plate. The license plate returned to a different vehicle. The VIN didn’t match DMV records either. Then he saw the steering column — it had been tampered with. This stop became a stolen vehicle investigation before backup ever arrived. The deputy called for help. That was the right call.
The Passenger
The passenger — later identified as Andre Raphael Mendez, 33, of Oceanside — gave the deputy a false name. That happened before anyone saw a gun. Before anyone gave a command. His first decision in this encounter was to lie to law enforcement. That tells you something about where his head was.
Backup Arrives — It Goes South Fast
Multiple deputies and a Palomar College Reserve Officer responded. As backup arrived, Mendez rolled up his window and ignored commands to keep it down. Then he reached to the floorboard and came up with a semiautomatic handgun.
What happens next is 90 seconds of officers doing everything right. They give him commands. They get the female driver out and escort her to safety — that is critical, and I’ll come back to it. They attempt to break the window. They deploy three Tasers. All of it ineffective. Mendez holds the gun and will not comply.
One thing I noticed watching the video — at one point a deputy correctly identifies the crossfire risk and backs his partner off the driver’s side. That is situational awareness under pressure. Good police work in a bad situation.
The Shooting
The window gets smashed. Mendez raises the gun and fires two rounds toward the officers positioned outside the car. Six officers return fire — five San Diego County Sheriff’s deputies and the Palomar College Reserve Officer. Mendez is struck and does not survive.
No other injuries. The female driver was already safe.
What the Video Shows
You can see the gun come up. You can see the moment he fires. The rounds rip through the driver’s door toward officers on that side — and I’ll note, there’s a moment where one deputy comes around a little close without thinking about where rounds are traveling through that door. Minor tactical criticism in an otherwise well-managed scene. Everyone went home.
The bodycam is out. The Sheriff released it on March 13. Watch it yourself. Draw your own conclusions from what you see — not from what you’re told to think about it.
The Claims — Let’s Go Through Them
Claim: It was just a traffic stop. He didn’t do anything wrong.
It stopped being a traffic stop when the VIN and the plate didn’t match the vehicle. It stopped being ‘he didn’t do anything wrong’ when he lied about his name, refused to comply, refused to drop the gun for 90 seconds, and then fired on officers. The traffic stop was over the moment he reached for that gun. Everything after that is an armed encounter. Judge it as one.
Claim: Six officers against one man — that’s overkill.
What exactly should they have done differently? Left the scene? Told some of themselves to go wait in the car? They were legally on that scene with a man refusing to put down a gun. What people don’t like is how it looks — because six officers made the decision to use deadly force simultaneously against a man who was firing at them. It’s a lot of rounds at once. It looks scary and mean. So does someone trying to kill you.
Claim: They should have de-escalated more. They could have backed off and waited.
They gave him 90 seconds of verbal commands. They got the driver out safely. They tried to break the window. They deployed three Tasers. De-escalation is not unlimited time and unlimited patience. The patience ends when the suspect raises and fires a gun at officers. That is where it ended.
Claim: Why didn’t they just let him drive away?
He was the passenger. The female driver was already out of the car. There was nowhere to drive. And even if there was — you do not let an armed man who is resisting arrest drive away in a stolen vehicle. That becomes someone else’s problem. Some victim he encounters down the road. That is on you. You are the police. You stay and make your arrest.
My Assessment: This Shooting Gets Cleared
Six officers spent 90 seconds trying to end this without shooting anyone. Three Tasers. A broken window. Repeated commands. It ended when Mendez raised the gun and fired first.
Under Graham v. Connor, force is judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on scene at the moment — not in hindsight, not in a courtroom, not in a press conference. Armed suspect. Repeated non-compliance. Lethal threat confirmed. Suspect fired first. The response was lawful.
These officers all did their jobs. They all went home. There’s not a much better example of a justified use of force than this.
A lawsuit is coming. The county will probably write a check because it’s cheaper than fighting it in court. That check is not a finding of wrongdoing. It is an attorney doing math.
This shooting gets cleared.
All you had to do was comply.
