1

Office of the District Attorney

Officer Involved Shooting Review on DA File Number 2013-01257-1

Decedent: Parrish Dennison
Officer Involved: Officer Anthony Sedler, APD
Date of Incident: March 5, 2013
Location: 7100 block of Menaul Blvd. N.E., Albuquerque, NM
APD Report # 13-020344

The investigation and legal analysis of the shooting of Parrish Dennison have been
completed. Based on the circumstances of the shooting, a review of all pertinent facts, including
witness statements and crime scene analysis, in conjunction with applicable New Mexico law, there
does not exist sufficient evidence to proceed on any criminal charges against Officer Anthony Sedler
in this matter.

The investigation of this officer-involved shooting was conducted in accordance with the
Memorandum of Understanding between the Albuquerque Police Department, the Bernalillo County
Sheriffs Department, the New Mexico State Police and the Second Judicial District Attorneys
Office. All three police agencies participated in the investigation and Chief Deputy District Attorney
Mark L. Drebing was present at the scene and for the briefing on the incident.

The following materials were used in our review of this case: the complete police report, the
crime scene report, photographs taken at the scene, officer lapel cameras, and audio recordings of all
witness interviews.

PLEASE NOTE, COMMENTS AND OPINIONS IN THIS REPORT ARE NOT
GIVEN, NOR SHOULD THEY BE USED, IN THE CONTEXT OF ANY CIVIL CASE
AND/OR CIVIL LITIGATION.

SUMMARY OF FACTS

On March 5, 2013, at approximately 6:08 p.m., Sergeant Sean Frick was dispatched to the
Music-Go-Round business at 7116 Menaul N.E. in reference to a female who was attempting to sell
stolen musical instruments to the business. Two male subjects were waiting in a black pickup truck
parked in front of the business. Sergeant Frick arrived at the location in a marked police vehicle,
pulled into the parking lot behind the pickup truck and initiated his emergency equipment. The
passenger of the truck (Parrish Dennison) then jumped out of the truck and began to run across the
parking lot. Sergeant Frick identified himself as a police officer and ordered Dennison to stop.
Dennison continued to run west through the parking lot and jumped onto a fence and then onto the
roof of an adjoining business.

Sergeant Frick called for additional police units and set up a perimeter around the area where
Dennison was hiding. Sergeant Frick could see Dennison on the rooftop intermittently as he moved
locations. At one point, Dennison came forward and pointed a silver revolver at Sergeant Frick.
2
Dennison jumped off the roof and ran north across Menaul Boulevard. As he did, he pointed the gun
at Sergeant Frick a second time. Dennison eluded police among the businesses on the north side of
Menaul Boulevard. Albuquerque Police Departments K-9 Unit was dispatched, along with
additional officers, in an attempt to locate Dennison.

A new perimeter of the area was established and the police departments Special Weapons
and Tactics (SWAT) Unit arrived. The police departments helicopter unit arrived and spotted a
subject hiding in the bushes on the northeast corner of Menaul Boulevard and Chama Street.
Officers were positioned at various locations around the subject (later identified as Parrish
Dennison). Officers Anthony Sedler, Chris Schroeder, Dan Brokaw, Albert Sandoval, and Nava
Marquez were placed at the northeast corner near the Chilis restaurant, in a containment position.
The restaurant was open and full of customers. Behind the restaurant was a hotel, which was also
active with patrons. Both locations were placed on lock-down (customers were required to remain
in the business) during the incident. The containment responsibility of the five officers at the
northeast corner near the restaurant was to ensure the safety of the patrons of the businesses and to
prevent Dennison from entering the area.

During the incident, one of the APD SWAT officers, James Perdue, accidentally discharged
his firearm. No one was hurt as a result of the discharge.

The Bernalillo County Sheriffs Department SWAT Unit was also on scene with an armored
Bearcat vehicle. A decision was made to approach Dennison with the vehicle as cover protection
and take him into custody. As the vehicle approached, Dennison stood up and ran northbound on
Chama Street. Officers could see that Dennison was holding a firearm in his hand. APD SWAT
Officer Francisco Aragon fired two shots at Dennison as he ran in the direction of the Chilis
restaurant. A flash bang distraction device was deployed. Dennison changed directions and ran
toward the door of the Oak Tree Caf, located toward the back side of the Chilis restaurant. APD
SWAT Officer Anthony Sedler fired additional shots. Dennison fell to the ground, still holding the
firearm in his hand. Another flash bang distraction device was used and a K-9 dog was released to
subdue Dennison before officers approached. The arrest team physically removed a handgun from
Dennisons right hand and handcuffed him. EMTs from the Albuquerque Fire Department then
transported Dennison to the University of New Mexico Hospital where he later died. Both officers
who fired at Dennison stated that they did so to protect themselves, other officers, and civilians in the
area Dennison was approaching.



RECORDED WITNESS INTERVIEWS

APD Sergeant Sean Frick

A recorded interview of Sergeant Sean Frick was conducted on March 5, 2013. Sergeant
Frick stated that on March 5, 2013 at approximately 6:30 p.m., he was dispatched to a 27-6 (Theft,
Fraud or Embezzlement) call. The dispatcher informed Frick that the call related to a female at the
Music-Go-Round store who was trying to sell stolen musical instruments. Sergeant Frick informed
3
the dispatcher that he would take the call himself, without backup, because he believed there was
only one person involved. While en route, the dispatcher informed Sergeant Frick that two males
were inside of a black pickup truck to the East of the business. Sergeant Frick asked for assistance.

As Sergeant Frick arrived, he parked behind the black pickup truck and turned on his
emergency lights. Sergeant Frick was in uniform, driving a fully marked police vehicle. The front
passenger got out of the truck and began running eastbound through the parking lot of the strip mall,
where the business was located. Sergeant Frick followed the subject in his police vehicle. As the
subject reached the end of the strip mall, he turned and ran westbound. Sergeant Frick got out of his
police vehicle and chased the subject on foot. As he was chasing the subject, Sergeant Frick yelled,
Stop, Police! The subject got to the West end of the strip mall and climbed up a wooden fence
onto the roof of a neighboring building. As the subject climbed onto the fence, Sergeant Frick drew
his pistol and again yelled at the subject, Stop! Get down! Get down! The subject did not
comply, briefly looked back and climbed onto the roof of the building. By this time, Sergeant
Fricks backup officer, Officer R. Tosta, arrived.

The subject ran across the roof and as he did, Sergeant Frick lost sight of him. Sergeant Frick
began to set up a perimeter and requested a K-9 officer to assist. He could see the subject
intermittently as the subject came closer to Sergeant Fricks side of the building. At one point, the
subject looked over the edge of the roof and pulled out a silver pistol from his waistband. The
subject pointed the gun at Sergeant Frick. The barrel of the gun was pointed directly at the officer as
the subject held it in his right hand. Sergeant Frick indicated that he believed that the subject was
going to shoot him, but based on the distance between the subject and Sergeant Frick, he did not fire
at the subject. Sergeant Frick moved further back and tried to find some cover.

Sergeant Frick yelled at the subject, Drop the gun! Drop the gun! The subject then
climbed down onto the ground from an awning and pointed the gun a second time at Sergeant Frick.
Again, Sergeant Frick did not fire his pistol because, AThe distance was too great and [Sgt. Frick]
didnt want to hit any bystanders if [he] missed the suspect.

The subject then ran northbound, across Menaul Blvd. Sergeant Frick announced over the
dispatch radio that the subject was running again and that he was armed. Once the subject reached
the North side of the street, he went around a building and Sergeant Frick lost sight of him. Sergeant
Frick stated that he then assisted other officers in setting up a new perimeter. He said that he heard
several shots fired later in the incident, but did not witness the shooting. Sergeant Frick stated that
he did not have a chance to turn on his lapel camera because of how quickly the incident transpired.

APD Officer Anthony Sedler

A recorded interview of Officer Anthony Sedler was conducted on March 6, 2013. Officer
Sedler stated that on the date of the incident, he was at home on an on-call status with the SWAT
team. He received a call out notification around 7:00 p.m. He started en route to the command post
and met with Sergeant Fox, who assigned him to supplement other officers in a containment
4
position. He then went to the East of Louisiana Blvd., near the Chilis restaurant. There were four
other officers at that location (Chris Schroeder, Dan Brokaw, Albert Sandoval and Nava Marquez).

Officer Sedler was told that the incident began when an on-duty sergeant tried to stop a
subject and the subject pointed a firearm at the sergeant. The subject fled and was hiding in the area.
The police helicopter was in the area and identified a heat source on the east side of Chama Street,
which was believed to be the subject who pointed the firearm at the sergeant earlier in the evening.

Officer Sedlers role was to provide protection and cover to the other four officers at his
location. Each of the other officers had less-than-lethal assigned weapons. One was equipped with a
beanbag shotgun, one was a K-9 handler with his dog present, one was to deploy a flash bang
distraction device, and one was going hands free. A short time after Officer Sedler arrived, he
heard a gunshot from the area. He later learned that an officer had accidentally discharged his
weapon.

While Officer Sedler remained at his assignment, he became aware that a plan was being
implemented for an arrest team to approach the area where the officers believed the subject was
hiding. They intended to use an armored vehicle to approach and announce their presence through a
public address system. It was the time of evening when most people would be having dinner, so
there were a lot of people in the area of the Chilis restaurant and the Sheraton Hotel, which were
both near where the subject was believed to be hiding. Officer Sedler stated he was concerned about
the possibility of a hostage situation if the subject broke the perimeter set by the police.

Officer Sedler heard that the heat source identified by the police helicopter was the subject.
Officer Sedler then heard a gunshot and saw a person, who he thought was the subject, jump up and
round the corner from the bushes very quickly. The subject sprinted away from the arrest team. It
was clear to officer Sedler that the subject was trying to avoid capture. As the subject approached
Officer Sedlers area, he saw that it was the subject the officers were searching for and that he was
armed with a silver revolver. The gun was in his right hand and he was holding it in a manner as if
he was going to use it to shoot somebody. A flash bang distraction device was used to try to
prevent the subject from leaving the area, but it had no effect.

The subject was running, with the gun, toward Officer Sedler and the other officers. The
officers were all dressed in full tactical gear, displaying police identification patches and markings.
Officer Sedler said that it was clear they were police officers. As the subject was running, he was
given commands: Stop! Police! Drop the gun! The subject was running directly toward the area
of the Chilis restaurant. When he got to the sidewalk, the subject jumped into the air and tried to
kick a door in at the building where the Chilis restaurant is located. Officer Sedler stated he was
concerned that if the subject gained access to the inside of the building, the subject would create a
hostage situation. At that time, Officer Sedler fired one shot to prevent the subject from accessing
the building and possibly threatening the lives of persons inside. The subject was approximately
fifteen yards away from Officer Sedler when Sedler fired.

Officer Sedler thought his shot hit the subject. The subject looked in the direction of Officer
Sedler. The area was well lit and Officer Sedler could clearly see the subject and his weapon. The
5
subject gave a wince and brought his arms in close to his body, at which point, he turned and faced
Officer Sedler, pointing the gun directly at Officer Sedler. Officer Sedler stated that he was in fear of
being shot and fired again. The subject turned and faced South, where other officers had been
positioned. Officer Sedler then fired a third time. The subject then fell to the ground and there was
no further movement from him.

Officer Sedler could see a fresh bloodstain on the sidewalk near his feet and thought he might
have been shot. He asked the other officers to check if they had been hit. The K-9 handler stated
that his dog had cut his foot, which was the source of the blood. Officer Sedler remained in his
position until relieved by another officer.

At the time of this incident, Officer Sedler had been working with the SWAT Unit for five
years and had been with the Albuquerque Police Department for sixteen years. Officer Sedler had a
helmet camera as a recording device but stated that he did not activate it because the incident
happened too quickly.



APD Officer James Perdue

A recorded interview of Officer James Perdue was conducted on March 6, 2013. Officer
Perdue stated that he was employed with the Albuquerque Police Department for approximately
seventeen years and with the SWAT team for approximately eight years. On the date of the incident,
Officer Perdue was at home in bed when he received a page concerning the call-out. He was given a
brief synopsis of the incident, including that officers were involved in the search for an armed male
subject. He went to his police car and informed his supervisor that he was active and en route. Upon
arrival to the location of the incident, Officer Perdue met with Sergeant James Fox and Sergeant Eric
Brown, who were in charge of the command post. Officer Perdue was given permission to
independently deploy, meaning he was to find an advantageous position to cover both the police
officers involved and observe the area where the incident was occurring.

Officer Perdue took with him a backpack, a single rifle and his communications equipment.
He ran to the area where he saw the majority of the officers being staged. Officer Perdue went to the
northeast corner of a business near the area where the subject was believed to be hiding. He
positioned himself between the building and the rear wheels of a tractor near the business. Officer
Perdue was lying on his stomach. He then traveled south, then west through an alley behind the
building, just south of Menaul Boulevard and east of Chama Street. From this location, Officer
Perdue moved to the east of the parking lot next to where the subject was believed to be hiding. He
laid down flat and placed his rifle on top of his backpack. Officer Perdue was aware that
containment officers were on the northwest corner of Menaul Boulevard and Chama Street.

Officer Perdue was grasping his rifle with his right hand and was adjusting his position while
lying in the ground. As he moved, he put pressure on the safety mechanism on the rifle. At the same
time, Officer Perdue stated that his index finger and middle finger of his right hand were along the
frame and trigger guard. He accidentally moved his fingers into the trigger well, causing the rifle to
6
discharge. The discharge sent a round low and to the east of where the subject was believed to be
hiding. The round appeared to cross the parking lot and enter into a building.

Officer Perdue quickly depressed the communications button on his radio and indicated that
he had an A.D. (accidental discharge). Knowing that the armed subject was near his position,
Officer Perdue stayed at his location.

Officer Francisco Aragon stated that he saw movement in the bush where the subject was
believed to be hiding. Officer Perdue could not see the movement, but was aware that there was a
response by the containment officers. He heard several bangs, but was not able to discern if the
noise was actual gunfire or less than lethal munitions. He then saw the subject upright and running.
He again heard several bangs and saw the subject fall to the sidewalk. Officer Perdue then moved
back to improve his field of observation. He remained in his position until he was relieved by other
officers.

Since Officer Perdue did discharge his rifle, he did not interfere with the spent cartridge from
the discharge. He went back and waited in his vehicle. At the time of the shooting, Officer Perdue
was approximately seventy yards away from the subject. Approximately five to ten minutes elapsed
between Officer Perdues accidental discharge and the movement by the subject. Officer Perdue had
a camera mounted to his helmet, but left his helmet in his police vehicle.



APD Officer Francisco Aragon

A recorded interview of Officer Francisco Aragon was conducted on March 6, 2013. Officer
Aragon stated that he had just arrived home from his regular shift when he received a page at about
7:06 p.m. on March 5, 2013. The page was a SWAT activation concerning an area search for an
armed subject. Officer Aragon was later advised by police on scene that they had located a subject
and requested Aragon to deploy his high ground equipment. His high ground equipment consisted
of a .308 bolt action rifle, binoculars, cold weather gear and other equipment needed on a SWAT
activation.

During the interview, Officer Aragon stated that a high ground deployment involved using
the optics from his equipment to observe and gather information for the rest of his team. He would
also be responsible to provide cover (protection) for the other officers in the immediate area as
well as the outer perimeter of the scene.

Once he arrived, Officer Aragon was instructed to deploy on top of the Chilis restaurant near
where the subject was located. Officer Aragon went to the main entrance of Chilis restaurant, which
had already been locked down. He was allowed access inside. Officer Aragon noticed that the
restaurant was full of customers. He went to a stairway to the roof of the building and set up on the
southeast corner. He took out his rifle and chambered a round. Officer Aragon then confirmed
where the subject was. He was able to see the bush, in front of a vehicle, where the subject was
apparently hiding.
7
After a period of time, approximately ten (10) minutes, Officer Aragon stated that he heard a
gunshot. He was then immediately advised that the shot was an accidental discharge by another
officer.

After another period of time, Officer Aragon was advised that an entry team would begin to
approach the subject and attempt to make contact. The entry team advised that the subject was
laying with his head to the east and his feet to the west. The team would use a Bearcat (armored
vehicle) and approach from the west. As the Bearcat approached, Officer Aragon saw movement
where the subject was apparently hiding. Through his night vision equipment, he saw that the
subject had a baseball cap and sunglasses on top of the cap. He could not see the subjects hands.

As the Bearcat moved west past a building, it illuminated the general area. Officer Aragon
then saw the subject stand up and immediately move out from the bush where he had been hiding.
Officer Aragon identified that the subject had a handgun in his right hand. At that time, Officer
Aragon fired one (1) round from his rifle. Officer Aragon was approximately forty to fifty yards
from the subject when he fired the round. Officer Aragon chambered another round, but the subject
had already moved onto the street. Officer Aragon located the subject and fired a second round. He
chambered a third round, but the subject was out of his view.

Officer Aragon ran north across the roof. He was concerned for the safety of his teammates,
who were positioned on the north end of the building. He was also concerned for the people inside
of the Chilis restaurant. Officer Aragon looked over the north edge of the building, but could not
see the subject.

Officer Aragon was unable to locate the subject from his position. He then heard a
flashbang (noise diversionary device) go off and heard more gunfire. As Officer Aragon began
walking south, he looked over the edge of the building and saw a male subject lying on the ground.
He could see that the subject was still holding a gun in his right hand, with his finger still on the
trigger. The subject was not moving. A police service dog was released. A team of officers then
approached and secured the subject. Shortly afterward, Officer Aragon was relieved from his
position by another officer.

On March 13, 2013, Officer Aragon was interviewed a second time, to clarify certain issues.
During the interview Officer Aragon diagramed where he thought the first round he fired may have
gone. (The police criminalistics team was unable to locate this round). Officer Aragon also stated
that he used night vision for both rounds he fired, without any magnification through his equipment.
After he fired the second round, Officer Aragon stated that he took off the night vision because he
had a clear view from the light that was on the street.



APD Nava Marquez

A recorded interview of Officer Nava Marquez was conducted on March 5, 2013. Officer
Marquez stated that he is a K-9 handler and became involved in this incident as a result of a text
message he received from his sergeant. The text indicated that he was being called out with his unit
8
in reference to an area search in the vicinity of Menaul and Louisiana for a subject who had pointed a
gun at an officer. Officer Marquez went to the scene with his K-9, Bo, and was directed to a
building which was northwest of where the officers believed the subject was hiding. Officer
Marquez was to serve as a less-than-lethal force option and also act as perimeter containment.

Once at his assigned location, Officer Marquez met up with officers Dan Brokaw, Albert
Sandoval, and Chris Schroeder. Their assignment was to confront and stop the subject if he came
into their area. After approximately fifteen (15) minutes had transpired, Officer Anthony Sedler
joined them at the officers location. Each of the four officers had a designated assignment if the
subject approached. Officer Sandoval was to throw a diversionary device. Officer Marquez would
deploy the K-9 service dog. Officer Brokaw would deploy beanbag rounds. Officer Sedler would use
deadly force, if necessary. Each tactic was dependent upon how the circumstances arose and how
close the subject approached their location.

Officer Marquez stated that as the police armored unit approached the subject, someone
called out over the radio that the subject was running. Officer Marquez then saw the subject come
around the corner, running directly at them from the north side of the street. Officer Marquez heard
a firearm discharge, but did not know who was shooting. The subject ran behind a car, then passed it
running toward the officers. Officer Marquez saw a silver object in the subjects hand and presumed
it was a firearm based on the information he had earlier received.

Officer Marquez began yelling at the subject, Drop the gun! Drop the gun! He believed
that he issued at least four commands before Officer Sandoval threw the diversionary device. Once
the device detonated, the subject ran to the side of the street where the officers were located. Officer
Marquez continued to yell, Drop the gun! Drop the gun! Officer Marquez then heard and felt
Officer Sedler discharge his firearm. He heard two (2) initial shots, followed by a third shot as the
subject began to fall to the ground. Officer Marquez could still see the firearm in the subjects hand.
The team in the armored approach vehicle then secured the subject.

Officer Marquez indicated that he was not able to deploy his K-9 because a struggle would
have more than likely ensued which would essentially force us to close distance with the subject,
knowing he was armed. Officer Marquez stated that, if the subject had not produced a weapon or
engaged the officers, the sequence was to use the diversionary device, then deploy the dog, then
continue with the beanbag rounds. Officer Marquez indicated that the subject was approximately
twenty (20) feet from their location when Officer Sedler fired at the subject.

Officer Marquez felt he was in a really vulnerable position because he was focused on
trying to get his dog oriented on the subject and had no means by which to defend himself. Officer
Marquez stated that he was in fear for his life and indicated that he was certain that the subject had a
handgun in his hand. He stated, We werent going to be able to stop him with the service dog, and
the likelihood of us putting effective less than lethal rounds on him were next to none.

Officer Marquez indicated that the service dog did not have any contact with the subject.
Officer Marquez noted, however, that during the incident, his dog injured his paw which resulted in
spots of blood in the area that they were located in prior to the shooting.
9


APD Albert Sandoval

A recorded interview of Officer Albert Sandoval was conducted on March 6, 2013. Officer
Sandoval stated that he received a dispatch concerning a subject who was armed with a firearm and
had fled police on foot. He stated that when he arrived at the scene, he was instructed by Sergeant
Eric Brown to take a position in the alley on Chama Street, between Phoenix and Menaul. He went
to the location. Officer Nava Marquez and Officer Dan Brokaw were already there. Officer
Sandoval received more information, upon arrival. He was told that the subject had pointed a
firearm at an officer while he was running away and the subject was possibly still armed. Police air
support had arrived and identified the area where the subject was hiding. Officer Sandoval stated
that Officer Anthony Sedler joined them shortly after he arrived. The officers agreed to take turns
holding point if lethal force was necessary. They also arranged a plan concerning assignments of
each officer. Officer Sandoval was responsible for deploying a noise/flash diversionary device if the
subject came out and tried to run. If the subject came out and was non-compliant to officers
commands, a police service dog would be deployed.

Officer Sandoval heard radio transmissions that the Bearcat unit was moving up. He then
heard a transmission indicating, Hes running. Officer Sandoval saw the subject come from
behind a building and run into the middle of the street. He was not complying with police orders to
stop. Officer Sandoval could not verify that the subject possessed a firearm. He deployed the
noise/flash diversionary device into the middle of the street. He could see the subject react to it and
heard Officer Marquez continually yell at the subject to drop the gun. The subject looked at the
officers. Officer Sandoval moved behind Officers Brokaw and Sedler. Officer Sandoval then heard
two rounds being fired, then a third round. The whole time prior to the shots being fired, Officer
Sandoval heard Officer Marquez yelling, Drop the gun! Drop the gun!

As the Bearcat approached the subject, Officer Sandoval ducked behind the building at his
location to prevent any crossfire issues. He never approached the subject and had no further
involvement in the incident.



APD Officer Christopher Schroeder

A recorded interview of Officer Christopher Schroeder was conducted on March 6, 2013.
Officer Schroeder stated that he responded to a SWAT activation concerning a male subject who had
fled from a field sergeant and had brandished a weapon. He stated that he was dispatched to
participate in an area search for the subject. When Officer Schroeder arrived, he was ordered by
Sergeant Brown to take a position with other officers between Phoenix and Menaul Boulevard, on
Chama Street. Their responsibility was to provide containment if the subject was to approach their
area. The other officers at Officer Schroeders location were Albert Sandoval, Dan Brokaw, Nava
Marquez and Anthony Sedler. Officer Schroeder was responsible for deployment of beanbag rounds,
if necessary. Officer Schroeder recalled that the State Police Bearcat Unit was being used to approach
the area where the subject was believed to be hiding. As the unit approached, Officer Schroeder
10
stated that he heard someone call out over the radio that the subject was running west toward their
area. Officers Sedler and Brokaw pivoted out to engage the subject. Officer Schroeder remained
tucked behind the wall. Officer Schroeder stated that he heard gunfire and determined that less lethal
force was not an option at that point. Officer Schroeder stated that he did not see the engagement or
the subject until after shots had been fired. He indicated that before the engagement occurred, he
heard several commands from the officers for the subject to stop and to drop the gun.



APD Officer Daniel Brokaw

A recorded interview of Officer Daniel Brokaw was conducted on March 6, 2013. Officer
Brokaw stated that at approximately 7:00 p.m., he was on his way to work out when he heard over the
police radio that a subject was running from police and had pointed a weapon at an officer. Officer
Brokaw was assigned to the K-9 unit and began heading in the direction indicated from the call.

Officer Brokaw dressed in full police uniform tactical gear and was directed at the scene by
Sergeant Brown to take a position with other officers on the north side of a building near where the
subject was believed to be hiding. Once there, he met with Officers Marquez, Sandoval, Sedler, and
Schroeder. Officer Brokaw stated that the police were approaching the area where the subject was
hiding with a Bearcat armored unit.

As they approached, he heard over the radio that the subject was running toward their location.
Officer Brokaw stated that Officer Sandoval deployed a flash-bang and it looked like it affected the
subject a little bit. Officer Brokaw stated that he could see a firearm in the subjects hand and that
it looked like a silver revolver. He stated that he heard several verbal commands from officers for the
subject to drop the gun.

After the flash-bang was deployed, Officer Brokaw stated the subject turned west and was
trying to break through a glass door of a caf. Officer Brokaw stated that Officer Sedler had lethal
coverage. He stated that he was tucked behind the building and by the time he got into a position
where he could do any good, Officer Sedler had fired three shots. Officer Brokaw stated he saw
that the subject still had the firearm in his hand and advised approaching officers to use caution.



APD Officer S. Weimerskirch

A recorded interview of Officer S. Weimerskirch was conducted on March 5, 2013. Officer
Weimerskirch stated that he was dispatched to the area of Menaul and Louisiana Blvd. at
approximately 6:30 p.m. He arrived at the scene at approximately 7:20 p.m. with his police service
dog and changed into his tactical gear. Officer Weimerskirch heard over his dispatch radio that the
police helicopter had observed a subject who ran from police hiding in some bushes near a truck.
Officer Weimerskirch stated that his understanding of the plan was to contact the subject through
public address announcements to get the subject to surrender himself. If this was unsuccessful,
chemical agents would be deployed.
11
While officers were waiting for an armored vehicle to arrive, Officer Weimerskirch heard
what he believed was a single gunshot. Approximately ten minutes later, Officer Weimerskirch
positioned himself behind the armored vehicle which had arrived and began to approach the area
where the subject was hiding. As the vehicle got near the area, the subject exited the bushes where he
had been hiding and ran out of sight. Officer Weimerskirch heard multiple gunshots and a noise
diversionary device. He then heard that the subject was down. Officer Weimerskirch could see the
subject on the ground, holding a silver handgun.

Officer Weimerskirch stated that another noise diversionary device was deployed. He then
released his police service dog to see if the subject would respond. After seeing no reaction from the
subject, Officer Weimerskirch call his service dog back. Officer Weimerskirch did not visually
witness the shooting.



APD Sergeant Eric Brown

A recorded interview of Sergeant Eric Brown was conducted on March 5, 2013. Sergeant
Brown stated that he heard over his police radio that an officer was in a foot chase. The dispatch
indicated that the subject was armed. Sergeant Brown went to the area to assist and contacted his unit
to assist in the search of the area. Sergeant Brown arrived at the Sheraton Hotel and requested that
responding police place the hotel and the Chilis restaurant on lock down for safety reasons.
Sergeant Brown then contacted Sergeant Frick, the officer involved in the chase, and obtained details
of the incident. Sergeant Brown activated the S.W.A.T. unit to handle the incident as an area search
for an armed subject.

While units were getting into position, the police helicopter located a subject hiding in some
bushes. Sergeant Brown directed tactical personnel to various areas around the perimeter where the
subject was located. While officers were being assigned, a tactical officer advised that he had an
accidental discharge of his weapon.

Sergeant Brown directed units to use the Bernalillo County Sheriffs Department armored
vehicle to approach the area where the subject was hiding. As the armored unit moved to the area, the
subject stood up from his hiding position and ran west, then north. Sergeant Brown stated that he
could hear officers yelling for the subject to drop the gun. He then heard what he believed was a
single gunshot, a flash bang (noise diversionary device), another gunshot, then several more
gunshots. Sergeant Brown heard over the police radio that the subject was down. The subject was
taken into custody and rescue personnel rendered aid. Sergeant Brown did not visually witness the
shooting.
12
Michael Betz

A recorded interview of Michael Betz was conducted on March 7, 2013. Mr. Betz indicated
that he was homeless. He stated that he woke up late at the University Lodge on Tuesday. He stated
that Duke (Parrish Dennison) contacted him to try to get rid of some musical instruments because
he needed some cash to get out of town. Mr. Betz stated that he met Dennison about two weeks prior
to the incident. Mr. Betz agreed to pick him up at approximately 5:30 p.m. When Mr. Betz arrived at
Motel 76, at 2007 Candelaria Boulevard N.E., to pick Dennison up, he was with his girlfriend,
Heather. Mr. Betz was driving a 2006 black Chevy Silverado. Dennison had two items he brought,
which were in guitar cases. Mr. Betz stated that they drove to the Music-Go-Round to sell the
instruments. Mr. Betz stated that he, his girlfriend (Lisa Robles) and Dennison went to the location
and that Lisa Robles went into the store with the instruments. He stated that he and Dennison then
went to the Cricket store to get a phone repaired.

Mr. Betz stated that they returned to the Music-Go-Round and Lisa came out and spoke with
them. She stated that the store would give them $220.00 for the instruments. She then went back into
the store. Mr. Betz and Dennison waited for her in the parking lot. After about thirty seconds, two
police vehicles pulled in behind them. The police vehicle, a marked SUV, had its emergency lights
on. Mr. Betz stated that he was not running from the police. Dennison got out of the truck and
started running east, then came back toward the truck running west. The police officer then started
after Dennison on foot. The officer was wearing his full police uniform. They both disappeared,
running west along Menaul Boulevard Mr. Betz backed his truck out slowly and left the parking lot
going north. He drove to a community church parking lot to see if Lisa Robles was released. Mr.
Betz got about thirty feet from his truck when he heard all hell breaking loose so he got back into
his truck and drove back to the University Lodge motel. He stated he left because he had an
outstanding warrant for his arrest. Lisa Robles returned to the motel after being interviewed by the
police. The police told Lisa that Dennison had been shot and that he had died. Mr. Betz and Lisa
Robles then packed up all of their belongings and checked into another motel.

Mr. Betz stated that he has a substance abuse problem and had been living on the streets.
He did not know that Dennison had a handgun at the time of this incident. Mr. Betz stated that
Dennison had told him that he had been in prison for seventeen years and that he would rather die
than go back to prison. Mr. Betz said that he had seen Dennison on previous occasions when he had
a chrome revolver. He carried the gun on a shoulder holster. Mr. Betz stated that he did not know
Parrish Dennisons real name, and he only knew him as Duke.

Approximately one week prior to this incident, Mr. Betz stated that he and Dennison were
involved in a high speed chase in which Dennison outran the police. During the incident, Dennison
told Mr. Betz again that he was not going back to prison. Dennison had indicated to Mr. Betz that he
had been in several high speed chases.

During the time Mr. Betz knew Dennison, he stated that Dennison knew someone in Las
Lunas and became more involved in the dope (drug use and trafficking). Mr. Betz added that
Dennison discussed with him, on several occasions, his intention and plans to rob a bank.

13
The day before the incident, Mr. Betz said that he and Dennison were doing dope and that
they needed money. Dennison gave him some musical instruments to sell to Music-Go-Round. Mr.
Betz stated that he took and instruments and sold them to Music-Go-Round because he had an I.D.
(drivers license or identification card). Mr. Betz stated that he believed that the musical instruments
they were selling were stolen. Mr. Betz offered that the drug of choice they were using was
methamphetamine.



Lisa Robles

A recorded interview of Lisa Robles was conducted on March 6, 2013. Ms. Robles stated that
on March 3
rd
or 4
th
, she met a male subject she only knew as David (Michael Betz) at the Sandia
casino. After talking with him for a while, she provided him with her cell phone number. On March
5, 2013, Robles said that around 2:30 or 3:30 in the afternoon, David called her and asked if she
wanted to do something with him. He picked her up at around 4:30 or 5:30 that afternoon in the area
of Central Blvd. and Louisiana Blvd. David arrived in a black truck with another male individual
(Parrish Dennison).

Ms. Robles stated that David asked her if she had any identification with her. She said she
did and he asked her if she would sell two guitars for him. She agreed and the three of them drove to
the Music-Go-Round business located at 7116 Menaul Blvd. N.E. Ms. Robles went into the business
with the guitars while both males waited in the truck. After a while in the business, one of the
employees informed Ms. Robles that there was an issue with the guitars and asked her to sit down
until the police arrived. As the police arrived, Ms. Robles noticed one of the males in the truck
(Dennison) run past the front of the business. Ms. Robles remained inside of the business until a
police officer arrived.



David Tvedt

A recorded interview of David Tvedt was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Tvedt stated that
earlier that day, a female came into the Music-Go-Round music store and tried to sell instruments
which appeared to have been stolen from a residence the previous day. The owner of the residence
which was burglarized came to the store and dropped off a flyer with instruments and serial numbers
of the items taken in the burglary. Mr. Tvedt stalled the lady and directed one of his employees to
call the police.

While Mr. Tvedt was waiting for the police, the female left the store and spoke with two males
who were sitting in a black pickup truck in the parking lot. Mr. Tvedt recognized the males as having
sold items to the store the previous day (March 4, 2013) which had been stolen from the same
residential burglary. When the female returned to the business, Mr. Tvedt directed one of his
employees to stand by the front door to prevent the female from leaving.

14
Mauricio Paez

A recorded interview of Mauricio Paez was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Paez stated that
he is an employee at the Music-Go-Round music store and has worked there for approximately two
years. He stated that at between 12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m., a subject whose house had been broken
into, came into the store trying to find musical instruments which had been stolen. The subject
identified a bass guitar and a guitar amplifier inside of the store. The subject gave Mr. Paez a list of
everything that had been stolen from the burglary.

At approximately 6:15 p.m. the same day, a female (Lisa Robles) came into the store with an
acoustic bass guitar and a banjo. Mr. Paez recognized the items from the list the subject whose house
had been burglarized had given him. Mr. Paez alerted the owner of the business, Dave Tvedt, who
detained the female. Mr. Paez contacted the police on the non-emergency number. Mr. Paez was told
that the female was with two males, who were seated in a truck outside. Mr. Tvedt recognized the
males as the subjects who had sold him the guitar and amplifier earlier.

Mr. Paez stated that Mr. Tvedt locked the door of the business and took the females cell
phone. As they detained her while waiting for the police, the female asked to go to the bathroom.
Mr. Paez escorted her to the bathroom, but had her leave her purse because he believed she had drugs
or a weapon in the purse. An S.U.V. police vehicle arrived with its emergency lights on. Mr. Paez
stated he saw an older male run across the front of the store and a police officer was chasing him on
foot. Mr. Paez did not witness anything further concerning the incident, other than hearing some
explosions. Mr. Paez stated that the store has video recordings of the subjects who sold the musical
instruments to the store.



Timothy Plath

A recorded interview of Timothy Plath was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Plath stated that
he is an employee of the Music-Go-Round business and was working at the time of this incident. Mr.
Plath stated that he observed a female (Lisa Robles) enter the store with a banjo and a guitar. The
owner of the business, Dave Tvedt, assisted her. After a short while, Mr. Tvedt locked the front door
to the business and told Mr. Plath that he had called the police. Mr. Plath stated that Mr. Tvedt took
the females cellular telephone and asked her to sit down. Mr. Plath stated that when two marked
police vehicles arrived, he saw an individual run from the officers as he passed in front of the
business. Mr. Plath had no further information concerning the incident.



Justin Baker

A recorded interview of Justin Baker was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Baker stated that
he witnessed a majority of the shooting incident. He stated that he arrived at his apartment at
approximately 6:30 p.m. when he saw police in the area. He stated that he was on his balcony,
watching what was occurring. He was with his neighbor. He saw what he believed to be two
S.W.A.T. teams by the jewelry store on the corner. Mr. Baker stated he heard that the subject the

police were looking for was in the bushes. He heard a distraction device and then heard the police
yelling at the subject to stop.

Mr. Baker said that he saw the subject raise his hand and he believed he was holding a gun in
his hand. Mr. Baker was approximately two hundred yards away and using binoculars. He stated that
the subject was running toward the police in a threatening manner and he thought the subject fired the
gun at the police. Mr. Baker stated the S.W.A.T. team at the northeast corner of the Chilis restaurant
fired six shots at the subject. The subject continued to run, holding a gun in his hand and moving
toward the police.

The subject changed directions and tried to break through the glass of the building. The police
shot two more times and the subject fell to the ground. Mr. Baker stated that he was pretty far
away. Mr. Baker witnessed an armored vehicle approach the subject and a canine handler release his
dog. The canine handler called the dog off. The officers then handcuffed the subject. Medical
personnel approached the subject and tried to revive him.



Trisha Nguyen

A recorded interview of Trisha Nguyen was conducted on March 6, 2013. Ms. Nguyen stated
that at approximately 6:30 or 7:00 p.m., she saw an older male subject run by the restaurant where she
was working. She stated that she was talking with another subject who said that he was going to
tackle him but believed he had a weapon. Ms. Nguyen stated that she then saw a black truck drive
away, going north. Ms. Nguyen did not see the incident but heard two explosions. She did not hear
any gunshots.



Leslie Calvert

A recorded interview of Leslie Calvert was conducted on March 5, 2013. Ms. Calvert stated
that she was at her place of business at approximately 6:60 p.m. when the audible alarm of the
business was activated. She stated that at approximately 7:30 p.m., she and another subject, William
Filter, exited the business and were immediately contacted by uniformed police officers, who yelled at
them to remain in the business. At approximately 7:40 or 7:45 p.m., Ms. Calvert heard what she
believed was a single gunshot, followed by a dog barking. She next heard what she believed were
seven more gunshots. She could hear people yelling but could not hear what was being said. Ms.
Calvert remained in the business until she was contacted by the police to provide an interview.



William Filter

A recorded interview of William Filter was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Filter stated
that he was at an electrolysis appointment at 7001 Menaul Blvd. when he heard an alarm activate at
approximately 6:30 p.m. He stated that he and a female (Leslie Calvert) left the business at
approximately 7:20 p.m. and were told by police to get back into the business. Between 7:30 and 8:00

15
16
p.m., Mr. Filter stated that he heard what he believed was a single gun shot. A few minutes later, he
heard what appeared to be four or five more gunshots. He also heard a helicopter flying over the
building. Mr. Filter did not visually witness any of the incidents in this matter.



Denise Bunnell

A recorded interview of Denise Bunnell was conducted on March 5, 2013. Ms. Bunnell stated
that she was inside her apartment looking out of her kitchen window when she noticed police activity
outside. She stated that before 8:00 p.m., she heard what she believed was a single gunshot. She
looked outside, but noticed that nothing had changed. Around 8:00 p.m., she stated that she saw a
SWAT vehicle moving in the area. Approximately ten minutes later, she heard a voice and saw a
flash and a loud boom. She then observed a subject running northbound on Chama Street. He tried
to hit the door at the Oak Street Caf and fell to the ground. She stated that a few minutes later, she
saw a police dog engage with the subject, then four police officers approached. She observed rescue
personnel arrive.



Georgeanne Urvanejo

A recorded interview of Georgeanne Urvanejo was conducted on March 5, 2013. Ms.
Urvanejo stated that at approximately 6:30 p.m., she was driving westbound on Menaul Boulevard
when she noticed police activity around the Chilis restaurant. She saw an individual walking
eastbound along Menaul on the north side of the street. She did not know if the subject was related to
the police activity.



Blaine Couch

A recorded interview of Blaine Couch was conducted on March 5, 2013. Mr. Couch stated
that he was getting gas at the Valero gas station at one of the gas pumps. He indicated that an officer
told him to get inside of his car. All of the lights at the gas station had been shut off. He stated that
he saw S.W.A.T. officers standing behind their armored vehicle on the sidewalk by a jewelry store.
He first heard one gunshot. After a few minutes, he heard a couple more flashbangs go off. Then
Mr. Couch heard yelling, but he could not hear what was said. He saw the suspect being hauled
away in the ambulance. He did not see the shooting incident itself.



Dana Whitehorn

A recorded interview of Dana Whitehorn was conducted on July 8, 2013. Ms. Whitehorn
stated that she was inside of her apartment at 2612 San Pablo N.E., when she observed a male
individual running northbound at Menaul Boulevard toward San Pablo. He then continued running
along San Pablo. She watched him until he went out of sight. She had no other information
concerning the incident.
17
Stephanie Chavez, Marissa Nevdi and Gary Miller

Stephanie Chavez, Marissa Nevdi and Gary Miller were inside of the Valero business at 6920
Menaul Boulevard when the incident occurred. All three stated that they were instructed to remain
inside of the business by police officers. None of the them witnessed the incident.



CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS

At the time of the initial dispatch in this matter, Sergeant Sean Frick was on duty wearing a
police department authorized uniform, displaying his badge of office and other police markings. He
was driving an Albuquerque Police Department vehicle with police markings displayed on the outside
of the vehicle. Sergeant Frick also identified himself to Parrish Dennison as a police officer several
times during the incident. As the incident transpired, all other officers involved were readily
identified as police officers based on their uniforms and clothing. Throughout the incident, officers
verbally identified themselves as the police spoke to Parrish Dennison. From all indications,
Dennison was aware that he was engaging with police officers throughout the incident.

The general scene of the incident began at the Music-Go-Round business located at 7116
Menaul Boulevard N.E. The business is located in a strip mall with a parking lot in front of the
business. The business faces north. The general area is comprised of businesses to include hotels,
restaurants, and retail stores. The strip mall is a single story, flat roofed building. The area
surrounding the business was well lit by natural light at the time of the incident.

The general location where the shooting occurred was on Chama Street, between Menaul
Boulevard and Phoenix Avenue N.E. (See Scene Photos, Attachment 3.) On the east side of the street
is a commercial building which houses several commercial offices. The front of the building faces
south and is bordered by hedged bushes where Dennison was initially hiding. The west side of
Chama Street contains a two story, flat roof building with several businesses on the ground level. The
building contains several large windows and a glass door which Dennison attempted to break through
during the incident. (See Diagram of Location, Attachment 1.)

The specific scene conditions, and the location and recovery of items of evidence are
consistent with the statements of witnesses in this incident. The shooting occurred on the west side of
Chama Street in front of the Oak Tree Caf. (The caf was closed at the time of the incident, but
surrounding businesses remained open with patrons present). (See Helicopter video, Attachment 2.)
SWAT Officer James Perdue was positioned on the south side of Menaul Boulevard at the Midas auto
business. Officer Perdues bolt-action rifle (f-1) (See Photos #385-389, #393-395, Attachment 12)
and a .308 casing (c-1) (See Photo #239, Attachment 7, and Photos #385-393, Attachment 12) were
found at that location. The casing was the result of the accidental discharge described earlier. A
deformed bullet (p-1) (See Photo #104, Attachment 7, and Photo #478, Attachment 10) was located in
the parking lot at the northeast corner of the intersection of Menaul Boulevard and Chama Street. The
bullet was consistent with the accidental discharge of Officer Perdue.
18
SWAT Officer Francisco Aragon was positioned on the roof at 6909 Menaul Boulevard, on
the northwest corner of Menaul Boulevard and Chama Street. On the southwest corner of the
building were three bullet impacts on the ledge of the roof. (See roof photos, Attachment 6) The
impacts were most likely caused by one of the two shots fired by Officer Aragon. Because Officer
Aragons rifle scope was positioned above the ledge, but the muzzle of the rifle was below the ledge,
the bullet of one of the shots impacted the ledge and caused the bullet to fragment. Two casings were
located on the sidewalk, below where Officer Aragon was located during the incident (c-2) (See Photo
#247, Attachment 7, and Photos #486, #489-492, and #494, Attachment 10) (c-3) (See Photo #251,
Attachment 7, and Photos #487, #494-497, and #499, Attachment 10). Officer Aragons rifles were
located on the roof (f-3) (See Photo #423, #425-428, #443, Attachment 12,), (f-4) (See Photo #423,
#425, #430, #443, Attachment 12) where he had been positioned.

A used tactical diversionary device (m-2) (See Photo #217, Attachment 7, and Photos #546-
549, Attachment 10) and the spoon to the device (m-3) (See Photo #226, Attachment 7, and Photos
#487 and #488, #541-544, Attachment 10) was found on Chama Street, near where the detonation of
the device occurred as Dennison crossed the street toward the Chilis restaurant. In the street was also
a bullet impact (i-1) (See Photo #8-9, Attachment 11), believed to be caused by the second shot fired
by Officer Aragon. A small bullet fragment was also found in the immediate area of the incident (p-
2) (See Photo #116, Attachment 7, and Photo #19, Attachment 11).



Three .223 caliber casings (c-4) (See Photo #256, Attachment 7, and Photos #524-527, #529,
#537-540, #555, Attachment 10), (c-5) (See Photo #261, Attachment 7, and Photos #524-525, #529-
531, #537-538. #555, Attachment 10), and (c-6) (See Photo #266, Attachment 7, and Photo #525,
#533-536, #538, #555, Attachment 10), were found at the corner where the containment team was
positioned. The casings were identified as having come from the three shots fired by SWAT Officer
Anthony Sedler.

A used tactical diversionary device (m-5) (See Photo #231, Attachment 7, and Photo #507,
#513, #520-522, Attachment 10) and a spoon to the device (m-1) (See Photo #209, Attachment 7 and
Photo #500-504, Attachment 10) were found in the street near the incident. This device had been
thrown in the direction of Dennison by the arrest team, after the shooting but prior to their approach of
Dennison while he was on the ground.

The sidewalk in front of the Oak Tree Caf contained bloodstains in the area where Dennison
fell after being shot. The area also contained several personal belongings of Dennison, including an
adjustable hat, (cl-1) (See Photos #122-123, Attachment 7, and Photos #507, #513-516, #520,
Attachment 10), a leather wallet (m-4) (See Photo #130, Attachment 7, and Photos #507-509, #511-
513, Attachment 10) and a gold and brown folding knife (k-1) (See Photos #198, #201-205, #208,
Attachment 7, and Photos #507-508, #511, #513, #516-518, #520, Attachment 10). The gun
possessed by Dennison at the time of the shooting was left immediately south of the entrance to the
Oak Tree Caf (F-2) (See Photo #84, Attachment 7, and Photos #507-511, #558, Attachment 10). The
gun was identified as a silver Ruger, New Model Six .22 caliber revolver. The hammer on the gun
was in the cocked position and was loaded with six .22 caliber cartridges.
19
The lapel cameras maintained by the officers at the time of the incident were reviewed and the
contents were consistent with the subsequent statements from the officers. However, the containment
officers near the Chilis restaurant did not initiate their cameras until after the shooting had occurred.
(See Officer Lapel Cameras 1-5, Attachment 5.)

Among the items found in Parrish Dennisons personal belongings were two checks from
Clark Libbey, written to Jacob Wenger for $230.00 each, a Wells Fargo checkbook belonging to Clark
Libbey, a New Mexico Identification card belonging to Jacob Wenger, a handwritten list of musical
items, a state inmate identification card belonging to Adam Honeyfield, two small baggies containing
a white crystal substance which appeared to be Methamphetamine, and a capped 50 unit capacity
syringe.

MEDICAL REPORTS

On March 14, 2013 an autopsy was performed on Parrish Dennison at the Office of the
Medical Examiner. The autopsy revealed multiple gunshot wounds to the chest, abdomen, thighs and
lower legs. A gunshot wound to the chest perforated the left lung and heart, leading to massive
internal bleeding. The trajectory of the gunshot was from left to right, downward, slightly front to
back. There was no exit wound.
A gunshot wound to the upper quadrant of the abdomen perforated the soft tissues of the
abdomen and cartilage of the left 8
th
rib. The trajectory was from front to back, upward, slightly right
to left. There was no exit wound.

A gunshot wound to the left thigh penetrated the soft tissues of the medial left thigh. The
trajectory was from back to front, upward and slightly right to left. There was an exit wound through
the upper left thigh.

A gunshot wound to the right thigh penetrated the soft tissues of the posterior right thigh. The
trajectory was from back to front, upward, with no significant left or right deviation. There was no
exit wound.

A gunshot wound to the right lower leg penetrated the soft tissues of the mid anterior and
proximal posteromedial lower leg. The trajectory was from front to back, upward, slightly right to
left.

There were two possible graze wounds, one on the right thigh and one on the right lower leg.
There were also injuries consistent with canine bites on the thorax, abdomen, groin, and lower
extremities. There were also abrasions to the head, mid back, and hands. There were abrasions and
contusions to the left thigh, left knee, and right thigh.

The cause of death was multiple gunshot wounds.

Post-mortem toxicology studies on the heart blood revealed the presence of amphetamine
(0.16mg/L) and methamphetamine (3.3 mg/L).
20

INPUT FROM PARRIS DE NNIS ONS NEXT OF KIN

On August 13, 2014, a letter was sent to the family of Parrish Dennison asking for their input.
No response was received by this office.



POTENTIAL CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST PARRISH DENNISON

If Parris Dennison survived this incident, he could have been charged with the following
felony offenses:

Aggravated Assault on a Peace Officer with a Deadly Weapon (31-18-16 NMSA) (Multiple Counts);
Receiving, Transferring or Disposing of Stolen Property (30-16-11 NMSA) (Multiple Counts);
Possession of Methamphetamine (30-31-23 NMSA);
Resisting, Evading or Eluding a Peace Officer (30-22-1(B) NMSA);
Possession of a Firearm by a Felon (30-7-16 NMSA)

Parris Dennison is a convicted felon, having been convicted of the felony offenses of:
Larceny (Over $250) (1993); Robbery 3
rd
Degree (1996); Residential Burglary (1998);
Possession with Intent to Distribute A Controlled Substance (2001); Possession of Drug
Paraphernalia (2001); Forgery (2009); Receiving or Transferring A Stolen Vehicle (2008);
Receiving or Transferring A Stolen Vehicle (2008); Felony Vehicular Eluding (2009).



FACTUAL CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

A thorough analysis of the evidence indicates that Officer Sedler shot Parrish Dennison in
self-defense, in defense of fellow officers and in defense of patrons of the businesses in the area.
Responding officers knew that Parrish Dennison was armed with a gun and had pointed it at Sergeant
Frick two times earlier that afternoon. Throughout the incident, officers identified themselves as
police officers by verbal commands and by appearance. Without question, Dennison knew that it was
the police department that was attempting to take him into custody. The incident transpired over
several hours. During the entire time, Parrish Dennison did not demonstrate any intention to
surrender. Dennisons aggressive actions toward officers posed a clear threat to them. Dennisons
actions were consistent with the statement he made to his accomplice, Michael Betz, indicating that,
He would rather die than go back to prison.

During the incident, several businesses in the surrounding area remained open. Officers tried
to secure a perimeter to protect patrons in the area. Several businesses were placed on lock-down
for the safety of the public. Prior to the shooting, Parrish Dennison attempted to elude police by
breaking into a building where several patrons were present. If he had succeeded in entering the
building, Dennison would have posed a tremendous threat to the occupants inside. Officer Sedler had
to make a split-second decision to fire his weapon in order to protect innocent subjects in the area.
21
All witness statements concerning both the actions and intentions of Parrish Dennison and the
police responses to those actions are consistent. (Police reports, crime scene reports, and witness
statements are included to this Review as attachments.)



LEGAL ANALYSIS AND THE LAW

Applicable law:

In New Mexico, criminal liability is established only if it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt
that someone has committed all the elements of an offense defined by New Mexico statute, and that
the offense was committed without any statutorily defined justification or excuse. While knowingly
or intentionally shooting and causing injury or death to another human being is generally prohibited as
aggravated battery or murder in New Mexico, the New Mexico statutes specify certain circumstances
in which the use of physical force or deadly physical force is justified. Generally, there is no dispute
that the officer in an officer-involved shooting intended to shoot at the person who is wounded or
killed. Thus, the determination of whether the conduct was criminal is primarily a question of
whether there was legal justification for the officers actions.

The New Mexico statutes provide that the use of deadly force is justified by anyone, including
peace officers, in the following situations:

NMSA, Section 30-2-7 Justifiable homicide by citizen.

Homicide is justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:

A. when committed in the necessary defense of his life, his family or his property, or in
necessarily defending against any unlawful action directed against himself, his wife or
family;

B. when committed in the lawful defense of himself or of another and when there is a
reasonable ground to believe a design exists to commit a felony or to do some great
personal injury against such person or another, and there is imminent danger that the
design will be accomplished; or

C. when necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any
person for any felony committed in his presence, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in
necessarily and lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.

The question presented in cases where self defense or defense of another is raised is whether,
at the instant the person fired the shot(s) that wounded or killed another, the person reasonably
believed, and actually believed that he or another person was in imminent danger of great bodily harm
or death from the actions of the person who was shot. In order to establish criminal responsibility for
knowingly or intentionally shooting another, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the
22
person doing the shooting either did not really believe he or another was in imminent danger, or, if he
did hold such belief, that belief was, in light of the circumstances, unreasonable.

In addition to the above statute, New Mexico law also states that homicide by a peace officer
is legally justified under the following circumstances:

NMSA, Section 30-2-6 Justifiable homicide by public officer or public employee.

A. Homicide is justifiable when committed by a public officer or public employee or those acting by their
command and in their aid and assistance:
(1) in obedience to any judgment of a competent court;
(2) when necessarily committed in overcoming actual resistance to the execution of some legal
process or to the discharge of any other legal duty;
(3) when necessarily committed in retaking felons who have been rescued or who have
escaped or when necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice; or
(4) when necessarily committed in order to prevent the escape of a felon from any place of
lawful custody or confinement.

B. For the purposes of this section, homicide is necessarily committed when a public officer or public
employee has probable cause to believe he or another is threatened with serious harm or deadly force
while performing those lawful duties described in this section. Whenever feasible, a public officer or
employee should give warning prior to using deadly force.

New Mexico courts have found that Section 30-2-6 (B) is intended to provide a police officer
with a wider scope of privilege than the general public with regard to the use of deadly force. A
police officer may be legally justified in using deadly force in a variety of situations that would not
apply to self-defense or defense of others by the ordinary citizen. Police officer justifiable homicide is
significantly different from self-defense or defense of others that is available to ordinary citizens. For
example, private citizens ordinarily may not be the aggressor and then claim self-defense. A police
officer may, however, have a lawful duty to be the aggressor in the course of fulfilling his or her
responsibilities to the public. This is another reason that justifiable homicide is different from simple
self-defense by citizen. State v. Mantelli, 2002-NMCA-033, 22, 131 N.M. 692, 42 P.3d 272.

Determining whether an officers use of force was reasonable is heavily fact-dependant.
According to the United States Supreme Court, the standard for a police officer is a reasonable
standard that requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case,
including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the
safety of officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by
flight. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396, 109 S.Ct. 1865, 104 L.Ed.2d 443 (1989). The
reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer
on the scene, rather than with 20/20 vision of hindsight. Id. It also must be remembered that the
perspective of the officer is often made in a split-second decision and in different conditions.
Archuleta v. LaCuesta, 1999-NMCA-113, 8, 128 N.M. 13, 988 P.2d 883.
23
Justifiable homicide is necessarily committed when a public officer has probable cause to
believe he or another is threatened with serious harm or deadly force while performing lawful duties.
State v. Mantelli, supra. For there to be probable cause, the facts must be such as would warrant a
belief by a reasonable officer based upon the expertise and experience of the officer.

Probable cause means the evidence presented would cause a reasonable person to believe
that an offense has been committed and that the accused committed the offense. Probable cause does
not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. New Mexico Jury Instruction 14-8006.



Legal Analysis:

Under the facts of the present case, the question to be answered is whether Officer Anthony
Sedlers use of deadly force against Parrish Dennison was justified under either Section 30-2-7
NMSA (Justifiable homicide by citizen) or Section 30-2-6 NMSA (Justifiable homicide by public
officer or public employee).

Under these statutes the following two issues must be determined: (1) Whether Officer
Sedlers action in shooting Parrish Dennison was based on the officers actual belief that he (or
another person) was in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm as a result of what he saw
Parrish Dennison do, and 2) Whether Officer Anthony Sedlers fear of imminent death or great bodily
harm was reasonable in light of all the circumstances of this event. This is therefore both a subjective
and objective analysis of the situation and Officer Sedlers actions.



Conclusion:

Based on the facts available to Officer Anthony Sedler at the time of the incident, it is the
conclusion of this office that there is no probable cause to charge Officer Sedler with any crime in
connection with the shooting of Parrish Dennison. A thorough analysis of the shooting indicates that
Officer Sedler shot Parrish Dennison based upon the actual belief that he, his fellow officers, and
citizens in the area were in danger of imminent death or great bodily harm as a result of Dennisons
actions immediately prior to the shooting.

Reports and Exhibits Attachments

1. Diagram of location


2. Helicopter video


3. Interview Transcript of Officer Anthony Sedler


4. Interview Transcript of Officer James Perdue


5. Interview Transcript of Officer Francisco Aragon


6. Interview Transcript of Officer Sean Frick


7. Interview Transcript of Officer Nava Marquez

8. Interview Transcript of Albert Sandoval


9. Interview Transcript of Officer Christopher Schroeder


10. Interview Transcript of Officer Daniel Brokaw

11. Officer Lapel Camera #1


12. Officer Lapel Camera #2


13. Officer Lapel Camera #3


14. Officer Lapel Camera #4


15. Officer Lapel Camera #5

16. Additional Photos:
a. F-2 identified on photo #84
b. p-1 identified on photo #104
c. p-2 identified on photo #116
d. c1-1 identified on photo #122, #123
e. m-4 identified on photo #130
f. k-1 identified on photo #198, #201-205, #208
g. m-1 identified on photo #209
h. m-2 identified on photo #217
i. m-3 identified on photo #226

j. m-5 identified on photo #231
k. c-1 identified on photo #239
l. c-2 identified on photo #247
m. c-3 identified on photo #251
n. c-4 identified on photo #256
o. c-5 identified on photo #261
p. c-6 identified on photo #266


17. Additional Photos (no numbered photos identified)


18. Additional Photos (no numbered photos identified)


19. Additional Photos Taken at Nighttime:
a. p-1 identified on photos #478
b. c-2 identified on photos #486, #489-492, #494
c. c-3 identified on photos #487, #494-497, #499
d. m-3 identified on photos #487, #488, #541-544
e. m-1 identified on photos #500-504
f. f-2 identified on photos #507-511, #558
g. m-4 identified on photos #507-509, #511-513
h. k-1 identified on photos #507-508, #511, #513, #516-518, #520
i. c1-1 identified on photos #507, #513-516, #520
j. m-5 identified on photos #507, #513, #520-522
k. c-4 identified on photos #524-527, #529, #537-540, #555
l. c-5 identified on photos #524-525, #529-531, #537-538, #555
m. c-6 identified on photos #525, #533-536, #538, #555
n. m-2 identified on photos #546-549


20. Additional Photos
a. i-1 identified on photos #8-9
b. p-2 identified on photos #19


21. Additional Photos
a. f-1 identified on photos #385-389, #393-395
b. c-1 identified on photos #385-393
c. f-4 identified on photo #423, #425, #430, #443
d. f-3 identified on photo #423, #425-428, #443


22. Additional Photos
a. i-200a, i-200b, i-200c photo series identified on photos #11-21

23. Supplemental Report

24. CADS Reports

25. Autopsy Report

26. Toxicology Report


27. Prior Felony Conviction Sheet