Police said the man held what looked like a handgun that later proved to be a pellet gun.
WALNUT CREEK, CA — A 46-year-old Walnut Creek man was shot and killed by police early Thursday after officers responded to reports of someone peering into homes and vehicles with a flashlight and holding what appeared to be a gun, authorities said.
The fatal shooting immediately triggered multiple reviews, including an independent investigation handled under Contra Costa County’s fatal-incident protocol. The case also renewed local attention on how police respond to calls involving suspected weapons and people who may be in a mental health crisis, a subject that has shaped policy debates in Walnut Creek since a high-profile police killing in 2019.
Police said officers were called at about 12:10 a.m. to the area of Alvarado Avenue and Buena Vista Avenue, a residential neighborhood near Buena Vista Elementary School and just west of Interstate 680. The call described a man in dark clothing looking into homes and parked cars with a flashlight. When officers arrived, they found a person who matched the description and who appeared to be holding a firearm, the Walnut Creek Police Department said in a news release.
Officers gave commands for the man to drop the weapon, but he did not comply, police said. An officer then fired, and the man was pronounced dead at the scene. No officers were injured, police said. In a statement posted in the hours after the shooting, the department said the area was secured and there was no ongoing threat to the public.
Investigators later determined the weapon was a pellet gun that resembled a handgun, police said. The man’s name had not been publicly released as of Thursday evening, and authorities did not describe what investigators believe happened in the moments just before shots were fired, including whether the man raised the weapon or moved toward officers. A neighbor told a local TV station that they heard several gunshots after midnight, followed by sirens, and by morning, police had blocked off nearby streets while detectives worked the scene.
The man’s mother, who identified herself only as Annie in interviews with Bay Area television stations, said her son had struggled for years with schizophrenia and other serious mental health problems. She said he had been hospitalized as a teenager after his first psychotic break and that his condition improved at times when he stayed on medication, but worsened when he stopped taking it. Annie said she had sought help repeatedly and had even obtained a restraining order against her son because she feared he could become violent.
“I’m not blaming the Walnut Creek police,” Annie said in one interview, adding that she believed county mental health systems failed to prevent a crisis from reaching the street. She said she lived on the same street where the shooting occurred and thought her son may have been heading toward her home. Annie said officers came to her door around 5 a.m. to tell her her son had been killed.
Police have not publicly confirmed the man’s identity, and they have not released body-worn camera video or detailed radio traffic from the incident. A newspaper report cited police as saying body camera footage was expected to be released later. Under California law, agencies can release certain records and video from critical incidents, including officer shootings, but timelines can vary based on investigative needs and legal review.
Walnut Creek police said the officers involved were placed on administrative leave, which is standard practice for many departments after an officer-involved shooting. The department did not say how many officers fired or how many rounds were discharged. The Contra Costa County coroner responded to the scene and removed the body later Thursday morning, according to a reporter who was at the location.
Separate from the police department’s internal review, the Contra Costa County District Attorney’s Office follows a countywide process for any incident in which an officer or civilian is shot or dies during a law enforcement encounter. Under that protocol, the district attorney’s office conducts an independent investigation to determine whether anyone involved may be criminally liable. The county sheriff’s crime lab is responsible for evidence collection at the scene of these incidents, and prosecutors can later issue a public report summarizing the investigation and explaining any charging decision.
In the Walnut Creek case, officials had not said Thursday whether prosecutors or outside investigators were already on scene during the overnight response, or when investigators expect to complete their review. The police department did not release the names of the officers involved, and the district attorney’s office did not immediately announce a timeline for a public report.
The shooting happened in a city that has faced intense scrutiny over police encounters involving mental illness. In June 2019, Walnut Creek officers fatally shot 23-year-old Miles Hall during a mental health crisis near his home. The killing sparked protests, lawsuits and calls for unarmed crisis response teams. In 2020, Walnut Creek agreed to a $4 million settlement with Hall’s family in a federal civil rights lawsuit, and the case continued to be cited by advocates pressing for alternatives to armed responses in behavioral health emergencies.
Thursday’s death also raised questions that often follow late-night calls about suspicious behavior. Police said the initial report involved a person looking into homes and vehicles, a description that can heighten concerns about burglary attempts. In many such calls, officers arrive with limited information and must quickly assess whether someone is armed. Investigators will likely focus on what officers could reasonably perceive at the time, what commands were given, how the man responded, and what options were available during the confrontation.
Neighbors described the area near Alvarado and Buena Vista as typically quiet, with single-family homes and tree-lined streets. After the shooting, multiple blocks were cordoned off, and residents were told to stay inside while officers secured the neighborhood and searched for any additional threat. Police later said there was no ongoing danger, but investigators remained for hours as evidence was collected and officers’ movements were documented.
As the investigation proceeds, key questions remain unresolved, including how long the encounter lasted, whether less-lethal tools were used or considered, and whether officers had any prior contact with the man. Authorities also have not said whether the pellet gun was loaded or whether it was a replica designed to resemble a real handgun. Police have not said whether the man was suspected of committing any crime beyond the reported behavior that led callers to alert authorities.
City officials did not immediately announce any public meeting or community briefing on the shooting, though such sessions sometimes occur after fatal incidents. Past cases in the region have included public releases of dispatch audio, limited incident summaries and later, longer district attorney reports that reconstruct events through witness interviews, forensic analysis and review of video.
For now, officials said the case remains under investigation. The man’s identity had not been formally released by authorities by Thursday night, and investigators had not announced whether any video from the scene would be made public in the coming days.
Author note: Last updated February 26, 2026.