Prosecutor Seeks Dismissal of Charges Against Man Shot by ICE
By Sudhir Choudhary
February 13, 2026
A federal prosecutor in Minnesota has filed a motion asking a judge to dismiss criminal charges against a man who was shot by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent during a January enforcement action, citing newly discovered evidence that contradicts initial government accounts of the incident. The request to dismiss with prejudice means prosecutors are seeking to end the case permanently, barring future refiling.
Motion Filed by U.S. Attorney’s Office
In an extraordinary court filing on Thursday, Daniel N. Rosen, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Minnesota, asked a federal judge to dismiss the charges against the man wounded in the ICE-involved shooting, as well as charges against another individual connected to the episode. Rosen’s motion states that evidence recently uncovered is “materially inconsistent” with representations made by federal officials in earlier charging documents and testimony.
Rosen, appointed by President Donald Trump to lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minnesota, wrote that dismissing the charges “with prejudice will serve the interests of justice.” Court filings did not provide full details of the newly discovered evidence, but the prosecutor’s stance marks an unusual reversal for a high-profile case involving federal immigration enforcement.
Context of the ICE Shooting
The incident occurred on January 14 in Minneapolis during a federal immigration enforcement operation. In the confrontation, an ICE agent shot Julio C. Sosa-Celis, who was wounded, sparking protests and heightened scrutiny of federal immigration tactics in Minnesota. Thousands of federal law enforcement agents had been deployed to the area as part of an intensified immigration crackdown under the Trump administration.
At the time, federal authorities portrayed the shooting as a response to an attack on the agent. However, inconsistent accounts and emerging evidence have prompted serious questions about the official narrative. Rosen’s motion acknowledges those inconsistencies and recommends dismissal as the most appropriate legal outcome.
Legal Grounds for Dismissal
Under U.S. criminal procedure, prosecutors may move to dismiss charges if they determine that continuing the prosecution is not supported by the evidence or is contrary to the interests of justice. A dismissal with prejudice prevents the government from recharging the same offense in federal court. Rosen’s filing argues that the integrity of the original charging documents has been undermined by the newly found evidence, thereby affecting the viability of the prosecution.
Legal experts note that it is uncommon for prosecutors to seek dismissal after filing charges, particularly in cases involving law enforcement use of force. The decision reflects growing concern within the U.S. Attorney’s Office over the accuracy of representations made to the court and the public.
Reactions and Public Debate
The motion to drop the charges has reignited debate over federal immigration enforcement and the use of force by ICE agents. Advocates for immigrant rights and civil liberties have criticized aggressive federal tactics and have pushed for greater transparency and accountability in shootings involving federal officers.
Protests in Minneapolis and other cities intensified after the January incident, with demonstrators calling for an independent investigation into federal law enforcement actions and an end to controversial immigration operations. Some legal observers have also questioned whether local prosecutors and federal authorities can effectively collaborate in cases where federal agents are central to the facts.
At this time, neither the Department of Justice nor the Department of Homeland Security has publicly commented on the motion or outlined how the conflicting accounts of the incident will be addressed moving forward. The judge will now consider Rosen’s request and determine whether dismissal is appropriate based on the evidence presented.
Broader Legal and Policy Implications
The motion to dismiss charges in this case arrives amid a broader national conversation about immigration enforcement practices under the Trump administration and the extent of federal prosecutorial discretion. Cases involving the use of force by federal agents have drawn significant public and legal attention in recent months, prompting questions about oversight, training, and civil rights protections.
Critics argue that dismissals of charges tied to controversial law enforcement actions may erode public trust in the justice system, particularly if official accounts are later found to be inaccurate. Supporters of the prosecutor’s decision maintain that the justice system must respond when evidence undermines previously asserted claims, regardless of the political or operational context.
Sources:
Major news coverage of the prosecutor’s motion and court filings regarding the ICE shooting in Minnesota and related developments.
Tags: ICE, Federal Prosecutors, Minneapolis, DOJ, Immigration Enforcement
News by The Vagabond News
