Federal authorities have arrested Carlos Ivan Mendoza Hernandez, a 36-year-old California resident, following a violent encounter with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents that left the man wounded. Hernandez now faces a federal charge of assault on a federal officer with a dangerous or deadly weapon, a move that comes after he was shot multiple times during a traffic stop in the state’s Central Valley.
The incident occurred on April 7 in Patterson, a rural town located approximately 80 miles southeast of San Francisco. According to his attorney, Hernandez was struck by more than six bullets, including shots to the face. The legal battle now centering on the event highlights a deepening rift between the narrative provided by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the formal charges brought by the Department of Justice (DOJ).
This case marks the latest instance of a person being injured by immigration officers and subsequently prosecuted by the federal government. In the Los Angeles region specifically, the DOJ has faced a series of dismissals and acquittals in recent months after failing to secure convictions against individuals accused of assaulting immigration agents.
Conflicting Accounts of the Shooting
The events of April 7 are the subject of starkly different interpretations. According to the DHS, Hernandez “weaponized his vehicle in an attempt to run an officer over,” leading agents to fire “defensive shots to protect themselves.” But, dashcam footage from a witness in a nearby vehicle shows Hernandez reversing away from officers who had firearms pointed at him before his car drove forward and jumped over a median.
While the footage is silent and grainy, Hernandez—through his attorney, Patrick Kolasinski—maintains that he only moved the vehicle to flee the bullets after he had already been shot. A second witness who released dashcam footage last week corroborated this sequence, stating that ICE fired the first shot before the car moved.
In the formal criminal complaint, an FBI special agent alleges that the vehicle “hit” an officer identified as Agent 1. Notably, the complaint does not allege that the officer suffered any injuries, stating instead that Hernandez drove toward officers in a manner that would have caused “serious bodily injury or death had the officers not taken evasive action.”
The Discrepancy in Federal Narratives
A significant point of contention in the case is the identity and history of the defendant. Todd Lyons, the acting director of ICE, previously alleged that the stop was “targeted” because Hernandez was an “18th Street Gang member wanted in El Salvador for questioning in connection to a murder.”
However, these specific allegations were absent from the Department of Justice press release and the court complaint filed on Tuesday. The DOJ’s documentation focuses instead on the fact that Hernandez was “illegally present” in the U.S. And was being targeted for “immigration violations.”
Attorney Patrick Kolasinski has vehemently disputed the gang claims, noting that the 18th Street gang is primarily associated with Los Angeles, a city where Hernandez has no known connections. Kolasinski further stated that while Hernandez had been accused of murder in El Salvador, court records indicate he was acquitted of those charges.
Key Timeline of the Investigation
| Date | Event | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| April 7 | Traffic Stop | Hernandez shot by ICE agents in Patterson, CA. |
| April 9 | Injury Reports | Attorney reports Hernandez hit by 6+ bullets, including the face. |
| Last Week | Witness Video | Second dashcam video suggests ICE fired before vehicle moved. |
| Tuesday | Federal Charges | FBI arrests Hernandez; DOJ charges him with federal assault. |
Questions Over the FBI Investigation
The process by which the charges were brought has also come under scrutiny. The FBI noted in its complaint that the charges are not based on testimony from the officers involved, explicitly stating: “The FBI has not been able to interview Agents 1 and 2.”
Kolasinski described the failure to interview the key witnesses—including the agent who was allegedly hit by the car—as “striking” after a week-long investigation. He suggested that the DOJ may have chosen not to “overreach” by including the DHS gang narrative, which he claims was a result of ICE failing to do “due diligence.”
When asked about the discrepancies, Lauren Horwood, a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, stated that the complaint is written to provide “sufficient probable cause for the requested warrant” and does not need to include all available information. She declined to confirm whether the DOJ stands by the DHS claims regarding Hernandez’s criminal record, noting the investigation remains ongoing.
Broader Implications and Personal Toll
The case follows a pattern of DHS facing criticism for making unsubstantiated claims about individuals injured during federal operations. In a separate January case in Oregon, DHS labeled a man shot by Border Patrol as a “vicious” gang member, only for a DOJ lawyer to later tell the court they were not suggesting the man was a gang member.
For Hernandez, the legal stakes are immense; he currently faces up to 20 years in prison. Beyond the legal proceedings, the incident has devastated his family. Hernandez, who worked in rehabilitating fire-damaged buildings, has a two-year-old daughter with a partner who is a U.S. Citizen. Kolasinski describes a family “turned upside down,” noting the emotional toll on the child and partner following the shooting.
Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.
The next phase of the legal process will involve preliminary hearings to determine the validity of the assault charges and the potential for bail. Further updates will depend on whether the FBI is eventually able to secure interviews with the ICE agents involved in the April 7 encounter.
We invite readers to share their perspectives on federal law enforcement accountability in the comments below.
