MIAMI — A Florida appeals court has overturned the conviction of a former North Miami police officer who was convicted for shooting at a man with autism holding a silver toy truck, a case that drew national headlines.

The Third District Court of Appeals last week overturned the misdemeanor culpable negligence conviction for Jonathon Aledda, who claimed he believed the man was holding a firearm and holding another man hostage during a standoff six years ago. Aledda missed and instead hit the other man, Charles Kinsey, a therapist who was lying in the street with his hands in the air.

The Miami-Dade State Attorney’s Office must now decide if it will retry Aledda, who was fired from the police department after the shooting. It is also considering asking the appeals court for a re-hearing. In a statement, State Attorney Katherine Fernandez Rundle said the opinion “is disappointing to all who believed that this shooting incident was unnecessary and incorrect.”

The court’s decision — made because jurors were not allowed to hear additional testimony about Aledda’s police training — was met with dismay by justice reformers who say it will make prosecuting bad cops even more challenging. But South Florida police unions hailed the opinion.

“It should have never gotten this far to begin with,” said Steadman Stahl, president of the South Florida Police Benevolent Association. “We stand by Officer Aledda for a very tough decision that he had to make in seconds.”

It was in July 2016 that Aledda fired three times at Arnaldo Rios Soto, but hit and wounded Kinsey, an unarmed behavioral therapist who was lying on the ground with his hands in the air, begging police not to shoot. Video of the incident went viral at a time when the nation was grappling with high-profile cases of death caused by police officers.

At his trial in June 2019, Aledda testified that he believed Soto had a gun and was holding Kinsey hostage in the middle of a North Miami street. A motorist had called 911 to report a man she believed might be holding a gun to his head.

Prosecutors argued that Aledda fired in haste, ignoring a radio dispatch from another cop who had determined the toy was no weapon. The jury acquitted him of two felony counts of attempted manslaughter but convicted on the misdemeanor. A Miami judge sentenced him to probation, and granted him a “withhold of adjudication,” meaning no conviction appeared on his record.

The appeals court, however, ruled that the conviction was tainted because the court refused to allow Aledda’s SWAT commander to testify about the special training he’d received on dealing with hostage rescues. The SWAT commander was not considered an “expert,” however, and the North Miami hostage situation was not being handled by the SWAT unit.

Still, in Aledda’s case, the court ruled, “the training undertaken by the professional would be relevant for the jury to consider in determining how and why the professional assessed and responded to the situation,” and whether his “response was objectively reasonable.”

In seeking to not allow the SWAT commander’s testimony, prosecutors had cited the case of former Miami police officer William Lozano, who was convicted of manslaughter for a 1989 shooting that left two men dead. An appeals court overturned the conviction, saying the state wrongfully introduced manuals and testimony that showed he’d violated departmental policies and training.

But in Aledda’s case, the court ruled, the testimony about Aledda’s SWAT training was key.

“He offered the testimony to show how he was trained to react to the precise situation with which he was confronted. Thus, the introduction of (the commander’s) testimony regarding Aledda’s training would assist — rather than confuse — the jury in determining whether Aledda’s response to the circumstances he encountered was criminally negligent.”

News of the reversal drew sharply different reactions.

Douglas Hartman, the police union-appointed attorney who defended Aledda at trial, said his client was “overjoyed.”

“We knew we were right in our defense of our case,” Hartman said. “He feels like he’s been vindicated.”

Soto’s family attorney, Matthew Dietz, said the family was disappointed. He stressed that Soto was sitting, rocking back and forth — behavior that is often natural for people with autism.

“The notion that any police training would instruct that this behavior justified shooting at any person is troubling,” Dietz said. “If so, there is a desperate need for additional training to ensure that disability-related behaviors are not seen as criminal.”

Kinsey’s attorney, Hilton Napoleon, said the ruling will add to significant existing challenges of criminally charging police officers when they break the law.

“I will say their ruling affords police officers greater latitude than common defendants … they’re creating a double standard between police officers and regular defendants,” Napoleon said.

Last week’s ruling could have a ripple effect on a number of pending criminal cases against police officers.

At least nine officers from three different police agencies in Miami-Dade County are awaiting trial for rough arrests. The track record for the State Attorney’s Office, however, in recent cases has been mixed — in three cases, officers have been acquitted at trial.

In its statement last week, the State Attorney’s Office said the opinion will change what jurors can consider.

“Since the 1991 Lozano appellate decision, prosecutors have not been permitted to use police policy and training as evidence in criminal trials involving police officers,” the office said. “Today’s opinion says that now, a charged police officer, in defense of a criminal prosecution, can utilize police policy and training as evidence.”

© 2022 Miami Herald
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Read more stories like this one. Sign up for Disability Scoop's free email newsletter to get the latest developmental disability news sent straight to your inbox.