The family of a 46-year-old woman fatally shot by San Antonio police officers during a mental health crisis is seeking to restore their federal lawsuit after a lower court dismissed the case.
Melissa Perez died in 2023 when officers opened fire as she approached a locked patio door with a hammer during what family members describe as a schizophrenic episode. Her children are now challenging the dismissal before a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing the officers used excessive force that violated constitutional protections.
The incident began when police responded to reports that Perez had cut fire alarm wires in her apartment building, believing federal agents were using them for surveillance purposes. After an initial conversation with responding officers, she retreated into her apartment.
What followed was an extended standoff that ended tragically. Three officers attempted to enter the apartment through a patio door. When they discovered it was locked and Perez moved toward them carrying a hammer, the officers fired their weapons. Two officers struck and killed Perez, while a third officer’s shots missed their target.
During oral arguments on Tuesday, the appellate panel pressed both sides on critical aspects of the case. Dan Packard, representing Perez’s family, disputed several key findings made by the district court, including determinations about whether officers could have retreated and their knowledge of the door’s locked status. He emphasized that body camera footage contradicts some of these conclusions.
Judge Stephen Higginson questioned whether legal precedent requires officers to retreat in such circumstances, asking Packard to identify specific cases supporting that position. The judge inquired about any established duty for police to withdraw and seek alternative approaches when confronting individuals in crisis.
The panel also scrutinized the defense’s position. Judges Higginson and Priscilla Richman questioned attorney Stephen Barron about why officers chose direct confrontation rather than allowing the department’s mental health unit to handle the situation. They particularly focused on the decision to fire through a barrier when Perez remained behind a locked door.
Barron maintained that Perez presented an immediate danger when she ran toward officers while armed, requiring split-second defensive action. However, Judge Higginson challenged this characterization, noting the physical barrier between Perez and the officers and questioning how she could have posed an immediate threat through a locked door.
The shooting’s aftermath brought significant consequences for the officers involved. All three were terminated from the San Antonio Police Department. Criminal proceedings followed, with the two officers whose bullets killed Perez charged with murder, while the third officer faced aggravated assault and deadly conduct charges.
A Bexar County jury subsequently acquitted all three officers of criminal charges last year, though the case continues to generate legal challenges through civil litigation.
The incident drew national attention and intensified examination of the San Antonio Police Department’s handling of mental health emergencies. The department’s police chief publicly criticized the shooting as unreasonable, a stance Packard cited during arguments to bolster claims of constitutional violations.
The appellate panel, which includes Judge Dana Douglas alongside Higginson and Richman, gave no timeline for their decision. Their ruling will determine whether the family’s federal lawsuit can proceed or if the lower court’s dismissal stands.
The case highlights ongoing tensions surrounding police interactions with individuals experiencing mental health emergencies, particularly questions about appropriate use of force and whether alternative response teams might better serve such situations.
Leave a Reply