A routine food delivery in Austin, Texas, turned into a high-stakes federal criminal case that has put immigration enforcement practices under intense scrutiny. Wilber Rafael Garces Perez, a 28-year-old Venezuelan national working as a DoorDash driver, was shot in the back by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer during a September 20 traffic stop. Now, instead of facing only deportation, he faces federal felony charges carrying up to 20 years in prison.
The details of the encounter reveal a stark conflict between official accounts and legal defense teams. Federal prosecutors filed a criminal complaint accusing Garces Perez of assaulting, resisting, and impeding a federal officer. According to the Department of Justice, agents pulled Garces Perez over after identifying him as having a final removal order. Investigators claim that as officers approached his vehicle, he accelerated and struck an agent with his car’s side-view mirror, prompting the officer to fire through the rear window.
Garces Perez’s legal team tells a vastly different story. His defense attorneys dispute the narrative that he intentionally targeted officers, emphasizing that he was simply trying to make a living when plainclothes agents intercepted him. Following the shooting, Garces Perez was transported to Dell Seton Medical Center for treatment. Within hours of his discharge, federal immigration authorities transferred him to a detention center—reportedly with the bullet still lodged near his spine.
His lead attorney, Kate Lincoln-Goldfinch, noted in court filings that Garces Perez appeared disoriented, deeply distressed, and in severe pain during his initial federal court appearance in Austin. Medical experts hired by his defense have urged immediate surgery to remove the bullet, while lawyers fight desperately to block his expedited removal from the country. The defense maintains that Garces Perez entered the United States legally in 2024 via the CBP One application, challenging assertions from the Department of Homeland Security regarding his legal status.
The incident has triggered broader questions about accountability and transparency in federal enforcement operations. Democratic representatives Greg Casar and Joaquin Castro have called for an independent investigation into the shooting. Compounding public concern is the revelation that the ICE officer involved was not wearing an active body-worn camera during the encounter. While Department of Homeland Security leadership previously announced plans to roll out body cameras for field agents, full implementation remains incomplete, leaving critical gaps in visual evidence of what actually transpired on that Austin street.
As the case moves toward a critical detention hearing, the legal battles are bifurcated. On one front, prosecutors are pursuing the severe federal assault charge, arguing that physical resistance against law enforcement warrants severe prison time. On the other front, civil rights advocates and immigration attorneys are fighting to ensure that criminal proceedings do not obscure independent inquiries into the use of lethal force by federal agents.
The outcome of this prosecution will set a dangerous precedent for how immigration enforcement interactions are adjudicated when physical confrontations occur. For now, a wounded delivery driver sits in federal custody, and an entire city waits for answers that body-cam footage cannot provide.
