On a Sunday morning in Austin, a young Venezuelan man delivering food for a living found himself at the center of a contested encounter with federal immigration agents that ended with a gunshot wound and a detention order. Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, 28, was shot by ICE officers during an arrest attempt whose precise sequence of events remains in dispute — a collision of competing accounts that mirrors the broader national friction between immigration enforcement, due process, and the limits of sanctuary policy. The case asks an old question in a new register: what obligations does the state o
Bodycam footage released after ICE officer shoots Venezuelan migrant in Austin
Wilber Rafael Garces Perez sustained at least one gunshot wound to his shoulder during the ICE arrest attempt and was subsequently detained at an ICE facility.
Officers assist him from the vehicle, contradicting claims he was dragged out
Mark
So what actually happened here? A man was shot during an immigration arrest.
Mimi
Yes. Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, 28, Venezuelan, was delivering food for DoorDash when ICE officers pursued him. He made a U-turn under a highway. Shots were fired. At least one hit him in the shoulder.
Luke
Do we know why they were pursuing him in the first place? Was he flagged beforehand, or did something trigger the stop?
Mimi
ICE says it was a targeted enforcement action—that he had a final removal order. But his attorney says he never got proper notice because the hearing notification went to an old address.
Mark
And the shooting itself—what does the bodycam show?
Mimi
Three gunshots on the audio. Then officers arriving to find him in the driver's seat, holding his shoulder. They help him out of the vehicle, cut his shirt to examine the wound. He denies having weapons.
Luke
The attorney claims an unmarked truck sideswiped him before the shooting. Does the bodycam address that?
Mimi
Not directly. The footage shows the aftermath, not the moments leading up to the gunfire. So we have the attorney's account on one side and ICE's statement on the other, but the bodycam doesn't resolve that particular claim.
Mark
What happened to him after?
Mimi
He went to the hospital, was treated, and then transferred to ICE detention the same day.
Luke
So the core question—whether the vehicle contact happened, whether it justified the use of force—that's still unresolved.
Mimi
Correct. The bodycam is a partial record. It shows the response, not the trigger.
The Pulse
- A DoorDash driver making a U-turn beneath an Austin highway became the subject of a federal pursuit that ended in gunfire — the gap between a routine delivery and a targeted enforcement action collapsed in minutes.
- His attorney alleges an unmarked ICE truck sideswiped his vehicle before agents opened fire; ICE insists he resisted and attempted to flee, framing both as federal crimes that endangered everyone present.
- Body camera footage released by Austin police complicates the narrative on all sides — showing officers assisting Garces Perez from his car, not dragging him, while the question of what triggered the shooting remains unanswered.
- At the legal core of the dispute is a removal order Garces Perez may never have properly received, with his attorney arguing a hearing notice went to an outdated address despite a filed change of address — a procedural crack that may have set the entire encounter in motion.
- Transferred to an ICE detention facility the same day he was treated at a hospital, Garces Perez now waits while the case accumulates unresolved questions about force, notice, and the boundaries of enforcement in a sanctuary city.
On a Sunday morning in Austin, a young Venezuelan man delivering food for a living found himself at the center of a contested encounter with federal immigration agents that ended with a gunshot wound and a detention order. Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, 28, was shot by ICE officers during an arrest attempt whose precise sequence of events remains in dispute — a collision of competing accounts that mirrors the broader national friction between immigration enforcement, due process, and the limits of sanctuary policy. The case asks an old question in a new register: what obligations does the state owe to those it seeks to remove, and what happens when the machinery of enforcement moves faster than the law it claims to serve?
On a Sunday in Austin, Wilber Rafael Garces Perez — a 28-year-old Venezuelan working a DoorDash shift — was shot by ICE officers during an arrest attempt that has since become the subject of sharply conflicting accounts. The Austin Police Department released body camera footage in the days that followed, offering a partial window into the immediate aftermath: three short videos, the sound of what appears to be three gunshots, and then officers arriving to find Garces Perez hunched in the driver's seat, his hand moving toward his shoulder.
His attorney, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, says an unmarked ICE truck chased and sideswiped her client's vehicle before agents opened fire. ICE disputes this characterization, stating that Garces Perez resisted arrest and attempted to flee — conduct the agency described as federal crimes that endangered officers and bystanders alike. The bodycam footage does clarify one contested point: rather than being dragged from his car, Garces Perez was assisted out by officers, one of whom called for shears to cut open his shirt so medics could assess the wound. An officer asked in Spanish whether he was carrying any weapons. He said no.
The legal backdrop is equally contested. ICE maintained that Garces Perez was subject to a final order of removal and that his work permit had expired in 2025 — and that a work permit, in any case, does not confer legal status. Lincoln-Goldfinch countered that the removal order stemmed from a hearing notice sent to an old address, even though her client had filed a change of address with the court. Whether Garces Perez ever had meaningful notice of the proceedings against him remains an open and consequential question.
After treatment at a hospital, he was transferred to an ICE detention facility the same day. The footage released by Austin police captures the aftermath but not the decision to fire, the alleged vehicle contact, or the full arc of the pursuit. What it does capture is a moment where immigration enforcement, due process, and the politics of sanctuary cities converge — and where the distance between a food delivery and a federal detention cell turned out to be very small.
On a Sunday in Austin, ICE officers shot a 28-year-old Venezuelan man named Wilber Rafael Garces Perez as they attempted to arrest him. The Austin Police Department released body camera footage this week showing what happened in the minutes after the shooting—three short videos that capture the local police response to an encounter that has become the subject of competing claims about what led to the gunfire.
Garces Perez was working as a DoorDash driver when the incident occurred. According to his attorney, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, an unmarked truck operated by ICE agents chased her client and struck his vehicle before officers opened fire. Garces Perez made a U-turn beneath a highway, and the pursuit continued from there. The bodycam footage shows what sounds like three gunshots, followed by officers arriving at the scene where Garces Perez sits hunched in the driver's seat, his hand moving toward his left shoulder in apparent pain.
The videos contradict at least one account of how Garces Perez was removed from his vehicle. Rather than being dragged out by agents, as some claims suggested, the bodycam footage shows officers in uniform assisting him from the car. One officer can be heard ordering someone to retrieve shears to cut open Garces Perez's shirt so medical personnel could assess his injuries. An officer asks in Spanish whether Garces Perez has any weapons. He says no. Another officer observes what appears to be a single gunshot wound.
Garces Perez's legal status became central to the dispute over what happened that day. ICE stated that he was subject to a final order of removal and that his work permit had expired in 2025. The agency emphasized that holding a work permit does not confer legal status in the United States. Lincoln-Goldfinch countered that her client received the removal order after a hearing notice was sent to an outdated address, even though he had filed a change of address with the court. The discrepancy raises questions about whether Garces Perez had proper notice of the proceedings against him.
ICE released a statement defending the operation, characterizing it as a targeted enforcement action rather than an indiscriminate stop. The agency noted that Garces Perez resisted officers and attempted to evade arrest—both of which, ICE said, constitute federal crimes and create danger for officers, migrants, and the public. The statement also criticized what it called "sanctuary politicians" for encouraging behavior that it described as dangerous. ICE did not directly address the allegation that an unmarked vehicle sideswiped Garces Perez's car before the shooting.
After receiving treatment at a hospital, Garces Perez was transferred to an ICE detention facility, where he arrived the same day. The bodycam footage released by Austin police provides a partial record of the immediate aftermath, but significant questions remain unresolved: the exact sequence of events leading to the decision to fire, whether the vehicle contact alleged by his attorney occurred, and the circumstances that led to the pursuit in the first place. The case sits at the intersection of immigration enforcement and questions about due process—a tension that will likely persist as more details emerge.
Notable Quotes
This illegal alien was the subject of a targeted vehicle stop. Resisting officers and evading arrest is dangerous for our officers, illegal aliens, and the public.— ICE statement
He's got… looks like one gunshot wound so far— Officer on bodycam footage
Want the full story?
Read the original at Fox News ↗
Crime & Justice