Illegal Alien Recovers $500,000 for Shooting by Border Agent Posted on March 2, 2015 by Sally Nyemba Border Patrol agent shoots illegal immigrant forced to pay $500,000. U.S. District Judge James A. Soto of Tucson, Arizona, awarded Jesus Castro, an immigrant and citizen of Mexico, $500,000 in damages, after a border patrol agent shot Castro in his spine. The need for border patrol has increased drastically in recent years due to the growing amount of illegal immigrant traffic that has flooded the United States. Castro was among a group of illegal immigrants that attempted to cross over into Walker Canyon, Arizona. When border agent Abel Canales received notice that a group of illegal immigrants were attempting to enter, he immediately made his way over to them. According to the record, Canales approached the immigrants, and when he tried to summon them into a central location, Castro began to run, and threatened Canales with a rock. In danger of injury or death Canales stated that at this point he felt threatened and “he felt he was in immediate danger of serious injury or death,” therefore, he was left with no other choice but to shoot Castro. Canales shot Castro in his spine, and left him permanently injured, impairing his ability to walk. Castro then filed suit against Canales for his use of excessive force. The due process clause of the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution endows an alien with the right to to bring suit, in spite of his illegal presence. Although this has become an extremely controversial area of law, the majority of states have maintained that illegal aliens should not be afforded the same rights and liberties as a citizen. However in In Wong Wing v. United States, the court held that “an alien who was unlawfully present in the country was not to be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” Therefore, although Castro was not a citizen, he was still entitled to due process of law. Canales argued that the shooting was justified because Castro attempted to assault him with a deadly weapon. However, Canales failed to cite any Arizona or federal law that supported his claim that a rock is a deadly weapon. Under A.R.S 13-105, a “Deadly weapon” means anything designed for lethal use, including a firearm.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 13-105. The court concluded that a rock is not designed for lethal use, although a person may use a rock as a weapon, it does not equal a deadly weapon under the statute. Additionally, the court found that Canales gave inconsistent testimony. The court held that therefore Castro’s story was more credible than that of Canales. After weighing the totality of the circumstances, the court found in favor of Castro. However, because the court also found that Castro was 10 percent responsible for the damages he suffered, $55,000 was deducted from his award, and it was ordered that he would receive a total of $497,943 which would include his medical bills as well as pain and suffering.