CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas – After a lengthy Monday morning and evening of jury selection, an ex-Uvalde school district police officer accused of endangering dozens of children during the 2022 Robb Elementary School shooting officially stood trial on Tuesday.
More than 400 prospective jurors were summoned Monday to fill 12 seats ahead of the trial of Adrian Gonzales at the Nueces County Courthouse in Corpus Christi. The jury, along with four alternates, was seated just before 8 p.m. Monday.
Nueces County court administrators said the trial’s proceedings would begin at 8:30 a.m. Tuesday. However, the pre-trial hearing began at 9 a.m.
Towards the end of Tuesday afternoon’s testimony, jurors were excused from the courtroom after testimony from a witness was called into question by the defense team.
Below is the timeline of events from Tuesday’s court proceedings.
9 a.m. - The pre-trial hearing began without the presence of the jury.
Judge Sid Harle, who is presiding over the case, asked to see unspecified photographs in the prosecution’s possession before deciding if they were permissible to use during the trial.
9:02 a.m. - Jason Goss, Gonzales’ co-defense attorney, began arguing that his client didn’t cause any injuries in the Robb Elementary School shooting.
“Our argument here, though, is that our client — the person on trial here — did not cause any of these injuries. He did not. Salvador Ramos caused these injuries, and he is not the person on trial," Goss told the court. “I only say that to start because it’s one of the things as litigators — criminal litigators — (that) we’re used to is having, I guess, that axiom of law."
9:03 a.m. - Goss said the defense team was not disputing the fact that the children named in the indictment were killed or injured in the shooting.
9:04 a.m. - Goss then drew a parallel from Gonzales’ trial to a previous court case where photos of an autopsy were introduced and the role those photos may have played in that verdict.
The photos in the prosecution’s possession were of the children killed in the May 24, 2022, shooting.
“Our position is that’s all that these (photos) are. That’s all they have relevance (for) is to show the death of,” Goss said, in part. “All they (the prosecution) need is to show something that is not in dispute in the first place, but the prejudicial danger — as the court has viewed these photographs — the prejudicial danger is extremely high."
9:09 a.m. - Goss’ argument concluded.
9:10 a.m. - Harle told the defense he had not seen the autopsy photographs. The defense attorneys, who have seen the photos, shared them with Harle.
9:11 a.m. - Harle began reviewing the photos.
9:20 a.m. - Goss asked the court to address “one more issue.” Harle granted Goss’ request.
“The state, in their indictment, charged Adrian (Gonzales) with conduct of endangering, but stopped that conduct at the point when the shooter entered rooms 111 and 112 (at Robb Elementary School). All of these photographs and everything else are from things that happened after the shooter entered rooms 111 and 112,” Goss argued, in part. “What they have (the prosecution) done is they have limited the conduct for which Adrian Gonzales can be criminally responsible up to the point that the shooter enters the room, and they have done that in their indictment.”
9:22 a.m. - Goss’ argument concluded.
9:23 a.m. - Harle discussed the nature of the autopsy photographs he viewed moments earlier.
“I’ve seen a lot of autopsy photographs. These are horrendous, not so much by the nature of the injuries but by virtue of the ages of the victims and the innocence of the victims,” Harle told the court. “Certainly, there is no doubt they are prejudicial.”
Harle then asked the prosecution if it could address the “probative value outweighing the prejudicial value” as well as Goss’ argument about the “limitation” of the prosecution’s indictment.
Bill Turner, who was appointed as special prosecutor in this case by Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell, began the state’s rebuttal.
“And, if I could, I would start exactly where he (Goss) ended, and that is that the indictment ends with the gunman entering (rooms) 111 and 112,” Turner began. “The indictment includes: ‘After the gunman entered rooms 111 and 112 and shot at a child or children in room 111 and 112.’ And so, we have a fundamental disagreement about what the state has accused this defendant of doing. We have accused this defendant of being aware that children are in imminent danger and failing to act in the face of that imminence.”
“It’s the state’s position that we’re not talking about one shot put the defendant on notice — not two shots put the defendant on notice — but the repeated shots at children at Robb Elementary School over a number of minutes is what caused this,” Turner concluded.
9:29 a.m. - Turner ended his argument. In his rebuttal to the court, Goss reaffirmed that the prosecution purposely limited its indictment of Gonzales.
9:31 a.m. - Goss’ rebuttal concluded.
After hearing both sides, Harle denied the defense’s motion before opening statements with a caveat. The judge said the “probative does outweigh the prejudicial,” but he won’t be “admitting the (autopsy) photographs (as evidence) at this time.”
“There are several that I may sustain an objection to and they will not go to the jury, but for purposes of the opening statement, I am denying the (defense’s) motion in limine,” Harle told the court. “But I am reserving my right to exclude many of these photographs at the appropriate time.”
9:32 a.m. - Goss asked Harle if the testimony from the families of the shooting victims “could be limited.”
9:33 a.m. - Turner said the state “intends to bring experts” — not the parents — to show how the children and survivors may have been mentally impaired by the shooting.
“It’s not about impact,” Turner told the court. “It’s about, ‘Were the children endangered?’ Mental impairment is one of the ways children are endangered. That’s the only reason for bringing it in is to show the PTSD, the mental impairment, from the event.”
Goss took exception with Turner’s definition of “mental impairment.”
“I have not seen, and we’ve looked, I’ve not seen any case where mental impairment has been defined like that,” Goss said, in part. “It would be, like, an injury that caused it (the impairment), not a psychological impairment. Which, definitely, is terrible, but that has not ever been interpreted that I have seen.”
9:34 a.m. - Harle ruled in favor of the defense’s latest motion.
Goss raised another issue with the court. He contended that the state should not be allowed to call the children victims of Gonzales. Instead, he suggested the state should only call the children victims of the shooter.
“We have put those types of motions in before because we do believe it could have a tendency to affect the jury,” Goss argued.
9:36 a.m. - In response, Turner cited a case where “two people can be responsible for a child being victimized: the person who does the injury, and the person that has the duty to prevent the injury.”
“His (Goss’) whole concept that these victims are not victims of Adrian Gonzales is completely contrary to what the law is,” Turner told the court.
9:38 a.m. - Harle ruled in favor of the defense’s motion.
“They (the children) can be referred to as victims — just not specifically as his (Gonzales’) victims — until that is proven, if it is," Harle said.
9:39 a.m. - The hearing concluded. Harle instituted a short break before jurors entered the courtroom.
9:47 a.m. - Jurors entered the courtroom.
9:48 a.m. - Harle read rules of jurors are expected to comply with during the trial.
9:54 a.m. - Gonzales’ indictment was read before the court.
10:03 a.m. - Harle asked Gonzales how he would like to plea.
“Not guilty,” Gonzales responded.
10:04 a.m. - The prosecution’s opening statement began with Turner.
11:06 a.m. - On behalf of the defense, LaHood concluded its opening statement.
Watch the prosecution and the defense’s full opening statements in the below video player.
11:11 a.m. - The state’s first witness, Gilbert Limones, was called to testify. Harle swore him in on the stand.
Limones said he is a full-time pastor who also worked at a funeral home across the street from Robb Elementary School on May 24, 2022.
Turner began his line of questioning.
11:12 a.m. - While at work, Limones said a fellow employee told him there was an accident “across the street.”
11:13 a.m. - As he walked to the crash site, Limones said he called 911. He then described what he saw at the crash scene.
“I remember, as I was crossing the street, I had to look to my left to see if there were other vehicles coming,” Limones said, in part. “As soon as I crossed over, I saw a truck that was in the gutter area. ... I didn’t see him (the shooter) come out of the vehicle, but all I heard, as I got very close to him, I heard someone yell out, ‘He has a gun.’ And I stopped, and I’m, like, ‘What gun?’ I couldn’t see a gun at the time.”
11:14 a.m. - Limones then asked the shooter if he was OK. Limones said the shooter stared at him.
“He just kept looking at me. As soon as he went like this (Limones mimicked the shooter’s stance of holding and pointing a rifle), it’s when I knew that he had a gun, and he started firing and I just turned around and started running back to the funeral home.”
“Did he fire before you turned to run or after you turned to run?” Turner asked Limones.
“I think it was after I turned (around),” Limones said.
11:15 a.m. - When he returned safely to the funeral home, Limones said he placed a second 911 call after the shooter fired at him.
11:17 a.m. - Limones, who recalled his vantage point from the funeral home, said he saw the shooter in between two vehicles in the Robb Elementary School teachers’ parking lot.
“And then I just saw him (the shooter) walking towards the end of the school. And then I saw some children were at the playground — at the pavilion,” Limones said. “I just remember him shooting at the children (at the playground).”
11:18 a.m. - Limones also witnessed a “white car” drive into the teachers’ parking lot “moments later.”
“I just remember him going to the classrooms (from the exterior of the school), and he started shooting window-by-window until he got to the door he walked in through,” Limones said.
After the shooter went inside Robb, Limones told the court he didn’t see any obvious law enforcement vehicles arrive at the school “at the time.”
“By the time he (the shooter) entered (the school), I heard the shooting inside the classroom,” Limones, who was on the phone for his second 911 call at the time, said. “At that point, I was begging 911 to please get officers out there. Then, I saw a police officer arrive, and I was telling them that he entered through that door.”
11:19 a.m. - Limones told the court he then got off the phone with 911 and called his mother.
“I said, ‘Mom, please, get into prayers,’” Limones recalled. “’Someone’s shooting at the children near the school.’”
11:21 a.m. - Turner showed a map to the court of the area around the school. Limones pointed out to jurors where the funeral home was located in relation to the elementary school.
11:25 a.m. - Limones’ first 911 call, which began at 11:29:14 a.m. on May 24, 2022, was played before the court.
11:26 a.m. - Limones was heard praying while on the phone with 911.
11:29 a.m. - Limones’ second 911 call was played before the court.
11:36 a.m. - Surveillance video from the funeral home on the day of the shooting was shown to the court.
11:39 a.m. - At the 11:28:21 a.m. mark in the video, a vehicle was seen crashing into a ditch.
At the 11:29:05 a.m. mark in the video, Limones and another funeral home employee were seen walking out to the crash site.
11:40 a.m. - At the 11:29:25 a.m. mark in the video, Limones and the employee were seen running from the crash site and toward the funeral home.
Limones said he remembered “bullets grazing us,” but he was unsure how many shots were fired at the two of them.
11:43 a.m. - At the 11:31:36 a.m. mark in the video, the “white car” Limones mentioned in earlier testimony was seen traveling toward the school.
The “white car” was a law enforcement vehicle.
11:44 a.m. - At the 11:32:23 a.m. mark in the video, two marked law enforcement vehicles appeared.
11:48 a.m. - A different funeral home surveillance camera was shown to the court. The camera angle shows more of the school parking lot than the first camera angle.
11:51 a.m. - The surveillance video showed the shooter hop over a fence and walk towards the school’s parking lot.
12:01 p.m. - Turner passed the witness.
Harle instituted a lunch break. Court proceedings are expected to resume at approximately 1:15 p.m.
1:23 p.m. - Jurors reentered the courtroom.
1:24 p.m. - Nico LaHood, Gonzales’ lead defense attorney, began cross-examining Limones.
1:36 p.m. - Limones told LaHood that he told an officer which door the shooter walked through to get inside the school. That particular officer did not walk through the same door the shooter walked into at Robb.
Limones said the officer he spoke to was not Gonzales.
1:37 p.m. - LaHood passed the witness. The state did not have any additional questions for Limones.
Harle excused Limones from the stand.
1:38 p.m. - The defense called its second witness, Texas Rangers Lt. Jason Shea, to the stand.
Shea is a cold case investigator with the agency.
1:55 p.m. - Several photos from the crime scene were shared with the court. One of them included a May 24, 2022, photo of the shooter’s truck after the shooting.
A rifle and magazines with live rounds were also found in the truck.
2:53 p.m. - Shea was excused from the stand.
The defense’s third witness, Texas Department of Public Safety Capt. Justin Duck, was called to the stand.
3:09 p.m. - Duck was excused from the stand, but he could be called back to the stand by the defense.
Harle instituted a short break for jurors.
3:34 p.m. - Jurors reentered the courtroom.
3:35 p.m. - Stephanie Hale, a third-grade teacher at Robb Elementary School on May 24, 2022, was called to the stand.
3:40 p.m. - As she described her reaction to the shooting, Hale said she saw the “dirt was, kind of, cloud up ... kind of coming towards us.”
3:41 p.m. - Hale told the court that she saw the shooter, who she described as the “horrible person.” The shooter was also “walking towards the door,” per Hale.
“He (the shooter) had all black, long hair and a gun,” Hale said.
4:12 p.m. - Four days after the shooting, Hale was interviewed by the Texas Rangers.
“During that interview, four days after this happened, you never told (Texas) Ranger (investigator) Benson that you had seen anybody matching the description of wearing all black with the long hair,” Goss said to Hale.
“OK,” Hale responded. “I mean, I don’t know. I don’t remember.”
“Let’s talk about that fact, though,” Goss said.
“OK,” Hale said.
“That would be a fact, when you’re talking to the Ranger, that you would think would be definitely relevant and important,” Goss said.
“Yes,” Hale said.
“Sure,” Goss said. “And I’m not trying to get on you, but that’s why I said the reason I have to ask these questions is because — and I think the prosecution would agree with me — the things you’re testifying to here today are not the things that you said to the Ranger at the time. Did you know that?"
“No. I don’t remember,” Hale said.
4:13 p.m. - Hale told Goss that her husband did not call her about the active shooter at Robb; she said he texted her about “stay(ing) inside and be(ing) safe.”
“So, if you had told the Ranger, at the time, that your husband was the one that told you there was an active shooter, could your memory just be different now?” Goss asked.
“I guess. Maybe,” Hale said.
“Do you remember, when you talked to the Ranger, you never told the Ranger that you saw clouds of dust coming up from the schoolyard?” Goss asked.
“I believe that I did,” Hale said. “Because I remember telling my family what had happened that day.”
4:14 p.m. - Goss asked Hale if she could review the statement she gave to the Texas Rangers.
4:15 p.m. - Turner did not object to Goss’ request as long as it was done without the presence of jurors.
Harle granted a break for jurors to leave the courtroom.
4:16 p.m. - Without the presence of jurors, audio from Hale’s interview with the Texas Rangers was played in court.
4:33 p.m. - Audio from Hale’s Texas Rangers interview concluded.
4:34 p.m. - After hearing the interview, Hale agreed that she did not tell the Texas Rangers about seeing the suspect “dressed in black with long hair and a gun” or “dirt flying up on the playground that ... you felt like you were being shot at.”
4:35 p.m. - Hale then told Goss that she described the shooter’s appearance and the dirt kicking up on the playground to the prosecution.
Citing the inconsistency in Hale’s Texas Rangers testimony vs. what she told the prosecution, Goss accused the state of a “Brady” violation, which refers to the violation when the prosecution withholds information from the defense.
“This is the first time that I’m hearing of this — in a trial of this magnitude — is when she testified on the stand about it,” Goss told Harle. “If she did report these things to the prosecution, we were entitled to that to prepare for this (trial).”
4:38 p.m. - Turner told the court that the state provided Hale’s grand jury testimony to the defense when she testified about the shooter being a man wearing “black.”
“I agree, but not at that location (and) at that time,” Goss responded. “And this is a man dressed all in black — not just all in black — with long hair and a gun."
4:39 p.m. - “Like there was more than one man in black with a gun at the south end of Robb Elementary?” Turned asked Goss.
“It’s not about who did the shooting. Of course, we all agree with that,” Goss responded. “(It’s about) at what time, when and where and how and what teachers had identified a shooter or had seen a shooter on campus.”
Harle agreed with Goss regarding the importance of the shooter’s location.
“Mr. Turner, do you have anything that you showed in your notes that you turned over to them (the defense)?” Harle asked the state.
“About the man in black?” Turner said. “No, Your Honor. I don’t.”
4:40 p.m. - Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell told the court that the lack of location information should not be considered “exculpatory.”
Mitchell also said Hale did not tell the state about the suspect’s “specific location.”
4:41 p.m. - Harle asked the defense if it was making any additional requests.
Goss asked and was allowed to confer with his fellow defense attorneys.
4:43 p.m. - Hale told Turner that she “didn’t remember” if she discussed where she saw the suspect with prosecutors ahead of Gonzales’ trial.
Harle asked Hale to leave the stand for a brief moment, so he could swear Mitchell in to testify.
4:44 p.m. - Turner began a line of questioning for Mitchell.
Mitchell told Turner that Hale described to the prosecution about “a man in black with a long rifle,” but Hale didn’t mention where the suspect was.
Mitchell also clarified that Hale mentioned the “dirt kicking up on the playground” detail in grand jury testimony.
Turner passed the witness to the defense. Goss began cross-examining Mitchell.
4:48 p.m. - Goss asked Mitchell if she had any notes about Hale discussing if she saw the shooter on “the sidewalk.”
“The term ‘the sidewalk’ today caught me off guard because I never heard that before,” Mitchell responded. Mitchell also said she had nothing in her notes referring to the suspect’s location.
4:49 p.m. - Goss asked Mitchell why no one on the prosecution asked Hale where she saw the shooter.
“You know, you’re getting very nitpicky,” Mitchell said. “Let me tell you something: when you were prepping for (these) witnesses, I was running a law office. And so, I was in and out of interviews. So, I can’t say that she said that and I (went), ‘Oh my God,’ you know? It wasn’t that type of reaction for me. That’s the best I can say.”
4:52 p.m. - Because the location of the suspect was a part of other witnesses’ testimony, Mitchell suggested Hale didn’t have to disclose where she saw the shooter.
“I would agree that that was already known, that that was out there,” Mitchell said. “I don’t understand why it was a surprise to you (the defense).”
“Because you didn’t report it when she told you, though. That’s why,” Goss said, in part. “I think you will agree with me that has not been turned over by your office in any shape or form before.”
“I would agree with you that I asked you (the defense) to come to my office and review our file,” Mitchell said. “That was on the record. I said, ‘I want y’all to come look through our complete file to make sure that you have everything.’ And that was agreed to, but I was never contacted. So, I did make our file available on the record before trial.”
Gary Hillier, a co-defense attorney for Gonzales, was seen shaking his head left and right when Mitchell said she asked the defense to come to her office.
4:53 p.m. - Goss reminded Mitchell the prosecution’s obligation belongs to the prosecution, not the defense.
Goss passed the witness back to Turner.
4:55 p.m. - Mitchell was excused from testimony.
Ricardo Garza, Jr., an investigator for the Uvalde County District Attorney’s Office, was sworn in to testify.
Turner began a line of questioning.
4:56 p.m. - In addition to location, Garza said Hale did not disclose when she saw the suspect “in black.”
Turner passed the witness.
4:57 p.m. - Goss began cross-examining Garza.
4:58 p.m. - Hale spoke with prosecutors in December 2025. Garza confirmed that no one on the prosecution team asked a follow-up question regarding where the shooter was.
4:59 p.m. - Goss argued that that follow-up question would have been a “common” and relevant to Hale’s testimony.
“Nobody in that room asked,” Goss told Garza.
“Correct,” Garza said.
Goss passed the witness. Garza was excused from testimony.
5 p.m. - Goss asked if he and his fellow defense attorneys could speak with Gonzales for a brief moment.
5:08 p.m. - The state and defense approached Harle’s bench.
5:10 p.m. - The meeting at Harle’s bench ended. Hale and the jurors were called back into the courtroom.
5:11 p.m. - Jurors reentered the courtroom.
5:14 p.m. - Harle dismissed court proceedings for the day.
Jurors are expected back in the courtroom at 9 a.m. Thursday. The state and defense will hold a hearing without the presence of jurors at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday.
Background
Gonzales, 52, is one of two now-former Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District police officers charged with child endangerment regarding the law enforcement response to the deadliest school shooting in Texas history. Gonzales is facing 29 child endangerment charges: 19 represent the children killed in the shooting, and the other 10 represent the children injured in the shooting.
An 18-year-old gunman also killed two teachers at the school on May 24, 2022.
The other officer, former Uvalde CISD Police Chief Pete Arredondo, has yet to go to trial in his child endangerment case. Arredondo is facing 10 child endangerment charges.
Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell is prosecuting the Gonzales case, but she appointed Bill Turner as special prosecutor. Turner was the former district attorney in Brazos County.
San Antonio-area attorney and former Bexar County District Attorney Nico LaHood leads Gonzales’ defense team. The team is rounded out by fellow attorneys Jason Goss and Gary Hillier.
In August 2025, Gonzales requested a venue change for the trial.
In the motion, Gonzales’ defense team argued that he cannot receive a fair trial by a jury in Uvalde County due to the impact the massacre had on members of the community.
“This horrific tragedy touched every member of the Uvalde community,” LaHood said at the time. “It would be impossible to gather a jury that would not view the evidence through their own pain and grief.”
In October 2025, LaHood confirmed to KSAT that the trial venue was changed from Uvalde County to Nueces County.
The state is expected to call approximately 60 witnesses to the stand. Court records indicate some of those asked to be witnesses include the Bexar County Medical Examiner’s Office, officers from other responding law enforcement agencies, medical personnel and some parents of school shooting victims.
Child endangerment charges are considered a state jail felony. Upon a potential conviction, Gonzales could be sentenced between six months and two years in a state jail.
Judge Sid Harle is the presiding judge in this case. If convicted, Gonzales also elected to have Harle determine his sentence instead of the jury.
More coverage of the Adrian Gonzales trial on KSAT: