Former LAPD officer Toni McBride, who fatally shot Daniel Hernandez in April 2020, now faces a civil trial after a federal appeals court reversed her qualified immunity. Here is the full story.
Former Los Angeles Police Department officer Toni McBride, once widely known as a gun influencer and competitive shooter, is now at the center of a high-profile civil lawsuit following her fatal shooting of 38-year-old Daniel Hernandez on April 22, 2020, in South Los Angeles. The case has gone through years of legal battles and has become one of the most closely watched police use-of-force cases in California, raising serious questions about qualified immunity, excessive force, and the role of social media in shaping a police officer’s public image.
The incident began when officers, including McBride, responded to a 911 call reporting a man who had crashed a pickup truck into several vehicles near 32nd Street and San Pedro Street in the Newton patrol area. The caller indicated the man may have been suicidal and was cutting himself in the street. When officers arrived, they found Hernandez wandering through traffic, dazed and holding an object. McBride ordered Hernandez to drop what she identified as a knife. According to body camera footage, McBride fired three separate two-bullet volleys over approximately six seconds. The first four shots struck Hernandez as he advanced toward officers. The final two shots — which proved fatal — were fired while Hernandez was already on the ground, a detail that became the central point of contention in the legal proceedings that followed.
The Los Angeles Police Commission reviewed the shooting and determined that while McBride’s first four shots were justified given the circumstances, her fifth and sixth shots violated LAPD department policy. The Commission’s ruling contradicted the position of then-LAPD Chief Michel Moore, who had recommended that all of McBride’s shots be deemed within policy. The California Attorney General’s Office separately concluded that the final shots were nonetheless legally justified under California self-defense law — a finding that only deepened the controversy surrounding the case.
McBride’s background added significant public attention to the case. At the time of the shooting, she was 23 years old and had already built a following of over 100,000 on Instagram by posting videos of herself firing high-powered weapons at training ranges, including a California ranch owned by renowned firearms trainer Taran Butler, who has trained Hollywood stars such as Keanu Reeves and Dwayne Johnson. McBride is also the daughter of Jamie McBride, a director of the Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union representing LAPD officers. Critics argued these connections raised serious questions about whether she would face meaningful accountability, while supporters maintained that her proficiency as a shooter had no bearing on whether her use of force was legally justified in the moment.
The legal battle has been lengthy and complex. A federal district court initially granted McBride qualified immunity, shielding her from the civil rights lawsuit brought by Hernandez’s family. A three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling, acknowledging that a reasonable jury could find excessive force was used but concluding that McBride had not violated clearly established law. However, the Hernandez family challenged that decision, and in June 2025, the full en banc panel of the 9th Circuit reversed the qualified immunity ruling in a 6-5 vote, citing a 2017 Orange County precedent establishing that continuing to shoot a suspect who appears incapacitated and no longer poses an immediate threat violates the Fourth Amendment. The case is now proceeding to trial in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles.
McBride, who was granted medical retirement from the LAPD before the appeals court ruling, has not publicly commented on the most recent legal developments. Her attorney did not respond to media requests for comment. The Hernandez family’s attorney, Narine Mkrtchyan, said the reversal represented a significant step toward justice for Daniel Hernandez’s daughter, Melanie, who was 14 years old when her father was killed and is now an adult pursuing the civil case.
The outcome of the trial is expected to carry broad implications for how courts evaluate police use of force and the limits of qualified immunity in California and across the 9th Circuit. Our thoughts remain with the Hernandez family as they continue to seek accountability in the years-long pursuit of justice.