ⓘThis article reports on a matter of public interest. Carrazco Law, A.P.C. is not representing any party involved in this incident unless expressly stated.
Armed Suspect Grazed by Police Gunfire After Opening Fire in Covina
Unknown Injured in Covina Officer-Involved Shooting
Unknown: Armed Suspect Grazed by Police Gunfire After Opening Fire on Officers
COVINA, CALIFORNIA (May 22, 2026): An armed suspect was injured during an officer-involved shooting in Covina after opening fire at responding police officers. Officers returned fire, grazing the suspect in the upper body before taking him into custody. The incident occurred when officers responded to a shots fired call in the area.
Liability for Los Angeles Officer-Involved Shootings
Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, individuals can seek damages for civil rights violations committed under color of law. California Penal Code § 835a establishes standards for peace officer use of force, while California Civil Code § 52.1 (the Bane Act) provides state-level civil rights protections. The U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable seizure, and Graham v. Connor (1989) 490 U.S. 386 establishes the objective reasonableness standard for excessive force claims. Law enforcement agencies, individual officers, and municipalities may be held liable for violations.
Failure to De-escalate: Officers may not have used required de-escalation techniques.
Excessive Force: The level of force may be disproportionate to any perceived threat.
Lack of Warning: Officers may not have given adequate warning before using force.
Mental Health Crisis: Persons in mental distress require specialized response.
Civil rights violations can result in both constitutional tort claims under federal law and state law negligence claims. AB 1506 requires the California Department of Justice to investigate officer-involved shootings. Damages may include medical expenses, pain and suffering, lost wages, and in cases of wrongful death, compensation for the family's loss.
Steps to Take After a Los Angeles Officer-Involved Shooting
According to the California Department of Justice, there were 131 officer-involved shootings statewide in 2022, highlighting the ongoing need for accountability and transparency in these incidents.
Request body camera footage through a California Public Records Act request.
Seek the involved officer's use-of-force history and prior complaint records.
Request the incident report and any internal affairs investigation documents.
File a government tort claim within 6 months of the incident.
Consult a civil rights attorney before making any statements to investigators.
Statute of limitations: 2 years, California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1. For claims against government entities: Government claim deadline: 6 months, California Government Code § 911.2. Contact an attorney promptly to protect your rights.
Investigating Los Angeles Officer-Involved Shootings
We at Carrazco Law, A.P.C. extend our deepest condolences to the family of Unknown. Did officers follow proper de-escalation protocols before the shooting occurred? Were there alternative methods available to safely apprehend the suspect without using deadly force?
Do you have questions about a Los Angeles officer-involved shooting? Our team is here for you. Call us anytime at (800) 541-3244. Se Habla Español. Free consultation.
Legal Context
Applicable California Law
42 U.S.C. § 1983, Civil action for deprivation of rights under color of law
California Penal Code § 835a: Standards for peace officer use of deadly force
California Civil Code § 52.1: Bane Act, state civil rights protections
Fourth Amendment: Protection against unreasonable seizure
California Government Code § 7286: AB 1506, requiring DOJ investigation of officer-involved shootings
Liability Analysis
In officer-involved shootings, potential liability may arise if officers used excessive force under the circumstances known to them at the time, failed to employ reasonable de-escalation tactics, or violated departmental policies. Depending on the investigation's findings regarding whether the suspect posed an imminent threat and whether officers followed training protocols, the city and individual officers could potentially face civil rights claims under federal and state law. Liability determinations depend heavily on the totality of circumstances and objective reasonableness at the moment force was used.
Statute of Limitations
Claims against government entities require filing a government tort claim within 6 months of the incident under California Government Code § 911.2. After the claim is denied or deemed denied, a lawsuit must be filed within 2 years under California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1 for personal injury or civil rights violations.
If You've Been Affected by a Similar Incident
Carrazco Law represents individuals and families affected by police shootings and officer-involved incidents across California. These cases involve complex federal and state laws including 42 U.S.C. §1983 (federal civil rights claims), Bane Act claims under California Civil Code §52.1, and government tort claims with strict deadlines (often six months from the date of incident under the California Government Claims Act). If you or a loved one has been affected by a similar incident, contact our office for a free, confidential consultation.
Free, confidential consultation · Se Habla Español
Frequently Asked Questions
How long do I have to file a claim after an officer-involved shooting in California?
You must file a government tort claim with the city or agency within 6 months of the incident under California Government Code § 911.2. After your claim is acted upon, you generally have 2 years to file a lawsuit under California Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1. Missing the 6-month government claim deadline can bar your case entirely, so prompt action is critical.
What does it mean when police say a shooting was 'objectively reasonable'?
Under Graham v. Connor, courts evaluate whether an officer's use of force was objectively reasonable based on the facts known to the officer at the moment force was used, without the benefit of hindsight. Factors include the severity of the suspected crime, whether the subject posed an immediate threat, and whether the subject was actively resisting or attempting to evade arrest. This standard may be challenged if evidence shows officers had alternatives or failed to de-escalate.
Can I get body camera footage from an officer-involved shooting?
Yes, under the California Public Records Act, you can request body-worn camera footage, although agencies may redact or withhold portions to protect ongoing investigations or privacy. California Penal Code § 832.7 allows public access to records relating to incidents involving discharge of a firearm at a person or use of force resulting in serious bodily injury or death. An attorney can help you navigate the request process and any denials.
What if the suspect was armed or fired at police first?
Even if a suspect was armed or fired first, potential civil rights claims may still exist if the officers' response was disproportionate, if they failed to use cover or concealment, or if they violated policies regarding warnings or de-escalation. Each case is highly fact-specific. Courts examine whether the level of force used was reasonable under the totality of circumstances, including what less-lethal options may have been available.
Who investigates officer-involved shootings in California?
Under AB 1506 (California Government Code § 7286), the California Department of Justice is required to investigate all officer-involved shootings that result in the death of an unarmed civilian. Local agencies may also conduct parallel administrative and criminal investigations. Independent review by the district attorney or civilian oversight bodies may occur depending on the jurisdiction.
Were You Affected? We Can Help.
Our civil rights and personal injury attorneys are available 24/7. No fee unless we win.
This article is published by Carrazco Law News for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading or sharing this content does not create an attorney-client relationship with Carrazco Law, A.P.C. Carrazco Law is not representing any party involved in the incident described above. If you have been affected by a similar incident, consult a licensed California attorney about your specific situation.
The information on this page is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship with Carrazco Law, A.P.C. If you have been injured or have lost a loved one, please contact our office directly for a confidential consultation.
