In a trial about police transparency and accountability in lethal officer-involved shootings, a jury of eight found ex-APD Officer Gabriel Gutierrez not liable for the death of Alex Gonzales Jr., who he shot in 2021. The decision comes after more than four years of investigations and legal battles over the killing by off-duty officer Gutierrez and on-duty officer Luis Serrato.
Over the nine-day trial, jurors heard evidence and testimony from various perspectives that wove together the events of the early morning of January 5, 2021, and the Austin Police Department’s subsequent investigation into Gonzales’ death.
The trial began with both Gutierrez and the city of Austin as defendants. The plaintiffs allege that APD, represented by the city, inadequately investigated what happened and failed to discipline Gutierrez, contributing to a “culture of impunity,” said expert witness Jeff Noble. Partway through the trial, though, presiding Judge Robert Pitman dismissed the suit against the city due to the plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate a connection between Gutierrez’s actions and APD policy.
Despite the city’s dismissal, Gutierrez himself remained on trial. The plaintiffs built a case anchored around a series of disputed facts, casting doubt on the version of events posited by Gutierrez – critically, whether or not Gonzales pointed a gun at Gutierrez’s face when their cars pulled next to each other while driving in Austin’s East Riverside-Oltorf area.
One disputed issue: How exactly did Gutierrez fire his gun? The plaintiffs demonstrated to the jury that APD trains and only permits officers to engage in targeted fire, or shooting at a specific target. Donald Puckett, attorney for the plaintiffs, asked Gutierrez a series of questions about his movements and visibility when firing his weapon, making a case that he “sprayed and prayed” rather than engaged in targeted fire.
Puckett asked Gutierrez if he kept his eye on his target the entire time he shot his weapon, thus practicing targeted fire, to which he responded yes. How could that be possible, Puckett asked, considering several bullets hit low on Gonzales’ car door. Puckett pointed out that Gutierrez had also claimed to not see Jessica Arellano, Gonzales’ girlfriend, in the passenger seat, yet he shot her three times.
Gutierrez nonetheless insisted he kept his eyes on Gonzales when he pulled the trigger, making a split-second decision while actively fearing for his life. He told the jury, “I recall feeling like I would die in that instance,” and made the best choices he could given the circumstances.
“This case is about a good police officer versus a lady trying to make a buck.” – Defense Attorney Albert Lopez
Throughout the trial, however, the plaintiffs suggested Gonzales never actually had a gun pointed at Gutierrez. The defense responded by highlighting to the jury that police found a gun on the floor of Gonzales’ car. The plaintiffs argued back that no bullet was found in the chamber of his gun and that the gun had not been fired, that Arellano stated to the District Attorney’s Office that Gonzales never had the gun in his hand during the incident, and that the only corroboration of Gutierrez’s story is that of himself.
Debates over details like these continued throughout the trial as the plaintiffs built their case against Gutierrez and his credibility. Puckett summarized in his closing statement that “when [Gutierrez] was confronted at this trial with the physical evidence, his story did not hold up.”
The plaintiffs, Alex Gonzales Sr. and Elizabeth Gonzales, parents of Alex Gonzales Jr., sought damages for excessive force and the rights violation of false arrest – citing intentionally or recklessly misleading statements.
After a grand jury failed to indict Gutierrez, allegedly due to “special treatment” for Gutierrez and “inadequate investigations” from APD, the plaintiffs said that this civil suit is their last hope for accountability.
Defense attorney for Gutierrez, Albert Lopez, gave his closing statement last. He told the jury that this case is “a struggle between a good police officer and a good family trying to do right by their son.” Lopez said that Arellano, on the other hand, Gonzales’ girlfriend and fellow gunshot victim, is motivated by money.
He cited a paternity test proving that Arellano’s child in the backseat of Gonzales’ car the night of the shooting was not related to Gonzales. Lopez claimed she knew this fact when she filed complaints against the city that said the opposite.
He said Arellano knew that the only way she could win compensatory damages for the incident was to claim that the shooting was unjustified. He said, “Really, this case is about a good police officer versus a lady trying to make a buck.”
“There are bad apples in the barrel, but [Gutierrez] is not one of them,” Lopez said. “There is nothing in this trial that has been presented to you that indicated otherwise.”
The jury ultimately sided with the defense, finding that Gutierrez credibly feared for his life and made a reasonable decision when he shot into Gonzales’ car. While Gutierrez, now at the Seguin Police Department, will continue his career as a law enforcement officer, the plaintiffs aren’t ready to give up.
They point to a recent Supreme Court decision overruling Barnes v. Felix – the case used to dismiss on-duty officer Luis Serrato from Gonzales’ suit – as one of the grounds for retrial that they are considering. “We do expect to file a motion for a new trial and an appeal if necessary after that,” Puckett told the Chronicle. “The case is not over.”
This article appears in July 11 • 2025.