The ruling in Estrada et al v. United States of America et al resolves a Federal Tort Claims Act lawsuit brought by the estate of Silvestre Estrada Vargas and two undocumented migrants he was transporting.
The dispute centers on a May 14, 2021 incident in Campo, California. Estrada picked up Francisco Madariaga and Jaime Madariaga-Gonzalez on the shoulder of SR 94, prompting Border Patrol agents to initiate a pursuit. The chase lasted approximately six minutes and covered four miles, with Estrada’s vehicle reaching speeds over 80 mph and swerving across lanes.
The pursuit ended when Estrada’s silver Nissan Altima entered a Circle K gas station parking lot. After crashing into a curb and sustaining significant front-end damage, Estrada reversed until blocked by an agent’s vehicle. He remained stopped for four seconds while agents approached with firearms drawn, believing the chase had concluded.
Estrada then revved his engine and accelerated forward at four to five miles per hour toward Agent Robert Godreau. Godreau fired three shots, followed by one shot from Agent Alba that struck and killed Estrada, and one shot from Agent David Mathews. All shots were fired within 1.1 seconds of the initial acceleration.
U.S. District Judge Anthony B. Allen, writing in findings of fact and conclusions of law filed April 23, 2026, held that the agents’ use of deadly force was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances. The court found that Godreau faced imminent danger as the vehicle accelerated toward him in mere feet, leaving no time for de-escalation or less-lethal alternatives.
The court rejected plaintiffs’ arguments that agents should have deployed dogs, helicopters, batons, or tasers. It noted that baton strikes to the head or neck would constitute lethal force, pepper balls fired into a vehicle would also be lethal, and tasers are ineffective against moving vehicles. The court further found that spike stripping the vehicle later on a dark, winding road would have been unreasonable given the prior high-speed chase.
Judgment was entered for the United States on all claims, including wrongful death, assault and battery, and negligence. The ruling applies California’s reasonableness standard for excessive force claims under the FTCA, which aligns with federal Fourth Amendment principles.