Ruling says “reckless and unreasonable” decisions led to deadly force after a minor theft at a Kissimmee store.
KISSIMMEE, FL — A federal judge has ruled that two Osceola County sheriff’s deputies are not protected by qualified immunity in a 2022 shooting outside a Target, allowing a civil rights lawsuit to move forward over the death of 21-year-old Jayden Baez and injuries to a passenger.
The decision, issued this week in a roughly 60-page order by U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell, centers on an April 27, 2022 confrontation that began as a low-level shoplifting call and ended with deputies firing into a car in the store’s parking lot. Presnell wrote that a series of “reckless and unreasonable” choices by deputies escalated the stop and that no reasonable officer would have initiated the takedown without making it clear they were law enforcement. The ruling removes a key legal shield for two deputies who fired their weapons and keeps claims alive for Baez’s family and survivors as the case proceeds.
According to the court’s account and case filings, deputies in unmarked vehicles surrounded an Audi outside the Target after store security reported about $40 worth of merchandise — a pizza and Pokémon cards — taken by a group of young men. The vehicles boxed in the Audi near the store just after the suspects left. The judge said the takedown was “organized, planned, and carried out” by multiple deputies, many of whom had just left a training on vehicle stops. When the Audi lurched forward and collided with law enforcement vehicles, Deputies Scott Koffinas and Ramy Yacoub opened fire. “Instead of focusing on safely conducting a stop, they opted for the one action that was almost guaranteed to sow chaos,” Presnell wrote in the order.
The barrage — more than 30 shots, according to the ruling — killed Baez, the driver, and wounded 19-year-old passenger Joseph Lowe. Presnell emphasized that the deputies did not activate lights or sirens and wore plain clothes, though some had sheriff’s vests, leaving the occupants little clear notice that the cars pinning them in belonged to law enforcement. The judge also noted that one deputy fired through the passenger-side window as the front of the Audi was already past him, citing that positioning as part of his analysis that deadly force was not justified to stop a minor theft or prevent escape.
Investigators previously cleared the deputies of criminal charges in 2022, but the civil case — brought by Baez’s family and survivors — targets both the deputies and the sheriff’s office. In their defense, county attorneys argued the shooting was reasonable under the circumstances and that the deputies were entitled to qualified immunity, a doctrine that can shield officials from liability when the law is not clearly established. Presnell rejected that argument, writing that the deputies helped create a dangerous situation despite what he described as a “small army” of 28 deputies and a helicopter covering exits that day. He said a reasonable person in the Audi might try to flee after being rammed by unmarked vehicles without warning.
The judge’s order points to training and planning decisions as contributing factors. Many deputies involved had just finished a vehicle-takedown course that ended early, and they were told to “gear up” for the Target call. Presnell said the failure to use lights and sirens before the box-in was a “most significant” lapse and criticized the decision to force a high-risk maneuver in a busy retail lot over a misdemeanor-level theft. The order does not resolve the full set of claims against the sheriff’s office but keeps the individual-capacity claims against Koffinas and Yacoub on track for a jury to weigh.
Attorneys for the Baez family praised the ruling. “This is a hard-fought case,” attorney Mark NeJame said, adding that the family sees the order as a step toward accountability. The sheriff’s office has maintained its deputies acted within policy, and county lawyers have said their position is that the force used was lawful under the conditions they faced. The department did not immediately provide new comment after the ruling. The Target store remained open after the 2022 shooting but cordoned off sections of the lot that day as detectives documented bullet strikes, skid marks and positions of the unmarked vehicles.
With qualified immunity denied for the two shooters, the case is expected to proceed toward trial unless the parties reach a settlement. No trial date has been set. The ruling means discovery and pretrial motions will continue in federal court, where lawyers are likely to seek depositions of deputies who participated in the takedown, store personnel who called in the theft, and investigators who processed the scene. Any further hearings, including on remaining claims against the sheriff’s office, would be scheduled by the court in the coming months.
The case returns focus to a deadly encounter that started with a small-dollar theft and ended with a fatal volley of gunfire in a crowded shopping center. As of Thursday, the judge’s order stands and the civil suit remains active. Attorneys said they expect the next substantive update to come when the court sets a scheduling order or conference date.
Author note: Last updated January 16, 2026.