Why prosecutors say Modesto police officers were justified in 2016 shooting

Stanislaus County prosecutors said Lonnie Ball was drunk, high on methamphetamine and refused to drop a loaded gun two years ago, when he violated a court order to stay away from his estranged wife.

As Ball continued toward his wife’s house with the Glock handgun, Modesto police officers David Wallace, Kalani Souza and Edgar Villalpando shot Ball, according to prosecutors. The 39-year-old man was taken to a local hospital, where he died from his injuries.

On Tuesday afternoon, the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office announced in a news release that prosecutors have determined that the deadly shooting was justified. Prosecutors said the officers were acting in self-defense or in the defense of others when they shot Ball.

“There is no question, objectively, that Ball posed an immediate deadly threat to everyone around him, especially the victim (Ball’s wife),” according to a letter the District Attorney’s Office sent to Modesto Police Chief Carroll on Monday.

This was fourth time this year the District Attorney’s Office has determined a police shooting to be justified. Three of the shootings involved Modesto police officers; the other involved Newman police.

Ball was shot by police April 10, 2016. At 6:42 a.m., Ball’s wife called 911 to report her estranged husband was outside her house in the 2000 block of Lance Street, just west of El Vista Avenue in Modesto.

Filed court documents indicated that Ball had been embroiled in a yearlong child custody dispute with his wife when he showed up at her home.

Prosecutors said Ball’s wife told the 911 dispatcher that her husband had a handgun, and was violating a domestic violence restraining order to stay away from her. She said Ball was kicking her front door, and she was afraid he was going to hurt her.

Then, Ball returned to his pickup and drove away as police patrol vehicles arrived and began to pursue him. His wife had given the dispatcher a description of Ball’s pickup.

The officers tried to pull over Ball, but he refused to stop and drove around “erratically,” according to prosecutors. At different points, the officers reported that Ball appeared to be trying to bait the officers to drive alongside his pickup.

Ball later drove back to his wife’s house. One officer told investigators that Ball stopped momentarily at the end of his wife’s street before accelerating onto the home’s driveway. Prosecutors said Ball got out of the pickup with the gun and headed toward his wife’s house.

Ball was heading in the direction of a large window and the front door, prosecutors said. Investigators reviewed police body camera footage of the shooting.

Prosecutors said the officers can be heard saying Ball had a gun. Souza and Villalpando were immediately behind Ball, and Wallace was to the side. The officers yelled at Ball to drop the gun.

When Ball refused to drop the gun and continued toward his wife’s house, they fired their guns at Ball, according to prosecutors. An autopsy revealed that Ball had .11 percent blood alcohol content, more than the legal driving limit of .08 percent.

Prosecutors also said Ball tested positive for methamphetamine/amphetamine. They said the combination of alcohol and drugs “would clearly have clouded his judgment.”

Investigators later discovered that the Glock handgun had a bullet stuck in its ejection port. Prosecutors said it could not be determined how this bullet ended up there, but the jammed gun suggests that Ball may have tried to operate or fire the weapon.

Each officer believed Ball was a “deadly threat” to his wife, and one of the officers believed Ball was baiting police into a confrontation during the vehicle chase.

“If Ball were able to gain entry into the house, the victim’s fear that Ball was there to hurt her would in all likelihood come true,” prosecutors said in the letter to the police chief. “It would have been a dereliction of their duty had the officers not stopped Ball from harming the victim under these circumstances.”

Thanks for your strong interest in local journalism. We rely on readers like you more than ever before, and we currently offer free access to five stories a month. We hope you see value in supporting us further with a digital subscription to help ensure we can provide strong local journalism for many years to come.

This story was originally published August 15, 2018 at 11:54 AM.