Prosecutors present crime-scene videos, casings and vehicle evidence in San Antonio officer-involved shooting trial

San Antonio prosecutors on May 22, 2022, introduced crime‑scene photos, video and packaged evidence linking a white SUV recovered at a nearby residence to an officer‑involved shooting at 14335 O'Connor Road, the San Antonio Police Department's crime‑scene sergeant testified.

The evidence matters because prosecutors say the items help establish where shots were fired, what ammunition was recovered at the scene and the location of a vehicle later found by officers. The witnesses included Sergeant Matthew Pearson of the San Antonio Police Department's crime‑scene unit, patrol officers who searched neighborhood streets, and detectives who conducted surveillance and effected an arrest.

"I was dispatched for an officer involved shooting," Sergeant Matthew Pearson testified when the state called him to describe the scene at the church parking lot, where he said investigators located spent shell casings, vehicle parts and later took video and photographs that were admitted as evidence. Pearson identified the case number as "SAPD22108229." He testified that much of the scene was in the east parking lot near O'Connor Road and that a patrol vehicle had been moved and rolled down a hill across O'Connor into a fence.

Crime‑scene exhibits admitted in court included a state video labeled in testimony as State's Exhibit 21, photo boards and a crime‑scene sketch (State's Exhibit 24). Pearson and other witness testimony mapped shell casings and vehicle debris across the parking lot and toward a playground area; Pearson described evidence items labeled E1 through E19 and said some items (E1–E15) consisted of shell casings while other items (E16–E19) were vehicle parts and glass.

Joe Rodriguez, a crime‑scene investigator for SAPD, showed jurors packaged evidence he and other CSIs processed at a secured vehicle processing facility and then testified in court. "This contains the casing and the live round," Rodriguez said while identifying State's Exhibit 52 and its inner envelopes (entered in court as 52A and 52B). He testified that both the live round and a spent 9‑millimeter casing were recovered from the driver's‑side floorboard of the vehicle the department later processed.

Photographs taken during processing were admitted as State's Exhibits 34–51 and published for the jury. Those images show a white SUV with a shattered rear windshield, damage to the right rear quarter panel and a partially deflated tire. Rodriguez and other witnesses identified the license‑plate characters shown in exhibits (recorded in testimony as NBX0535/NVX0535 variants in the exhibits) and said the vehicle had been towed to a secured storage facility after officers removed it from a driveway.

Investigators also recovered non‑ammunition items from the vehicle that the state entered into evidence: a name tag bearing the name "Tyler" found in the passenger seat crevice (State's Exhibit 53), a Wells Fargo ATM card (State's Exhibit 54) and an empty liquor bottle. Forensic swabs of multiple vehicle surfaces — including headrests, steering wheel, gear shift and interior door handles — were packaged for DNA testing (State's Exhibits 57–63), and officers attempted latent‑print lifts from vehicle surfaces.

Officer Landon Urbanowski, who testified about his body‑worn video, identified the media (State's Exhibit 33) and confirmed it was a recording from his camera of the scene and of the vehicle being transported to the SAPD secured facility. "This is my body cam video," Urbanowski said when the exhibit was shown in court; the recording was admitted without objection.

Detective Matt Robles of an undercover/covert unit described surveillance that led to an arrest at an apartment complex. Robles testified that he established surveillance at an apartment breezeway and "observed who I recognized to be the the target we were looking for." He said he called for marked units to make a controlled take‑down; the defendant was taken into custody without resisting, was searched and "did not have a firearm on," Robles testified. Robles also identified his body‑worn recording of the arrest (State's Exhibit 64), which the court admitted.

Prosecutors and witnesses repeatedly emphasized chain‑of‑custody and evidence integrity: casings and items were sealed with evidence tape, initialed by the seizure officer and later opened and initialed by the crime lab, witnesses said. Sergeant Pearson and CSI Rodriguez described packaging protocols and confirmed that the items admitted at trial were the same items they seized and processed.

Courtroom entries recorded many admitted exhibits. The trial record shows the state offered and the court admitted multiple photo exhibits, packaged casings and rounds, processing photographs, identification items recovered from the vehicle, and digital recordings from officer body cameras and crime‑scene video. Detectives also reported interviewing a resident (identified in testimony as Xavier Salazar) who may have had neighborhood video; that video was not presented because Salazar could not access it at the time, the officer said.

No witness testimony at the hearing attributed a firearm or shots directly to a named officer; investigators described physical evidence recovered at the parking lot and from the later‑seized vehicle and explained limitations of interpreting shell‑casing locations (for example, casings can be moved by vehicle wheels or vary depending on firearm ejection ports). Pearson said those factors can affect where shell casings end up and cautioned that casing location alone does not definitively identify a shooter's position.

The evidence phase concluded with the admitted exhibits remaining available to the parties and with indications that further forensic testing (DNA, fingerprint comparisons, ballistics testing) would be handled by forensic labs and separate units. Detective Robles' testimony and the body‑camera recordings established that officers located and arrested a person they believed was the target after a planned surveillance.

The court record shows those admitted exhibits and witness statements will be part of the state's case as the matter proceeds. The transcript does not include a verdict or a judicial ruling resolving guilt or innocence; the hearing reported is limited to testimony and submission of physical evidence and witness recordings.