CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas – The state, led by Uvalde County District Attorney Christina Mitchell and special prosecutor Bill Turner, rested its case Tuesday in the trial of an ex-Uvalde school district police officer.
The defense followed soon after and rested its case after the court’s lunch break ended Tuesday afternoon.
Due to his response to the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, Adrian Gonzales has been charged with endangering the lives of 29 children on May 24, 2022.
Here are four takeaways from Tuesday’s court proceedings inside the Nueces County Courthouse in Corpus Christi.
Courtroom tension continues
Lead defense attorney Nico LaHood appeared, at times, miffed when Texas DPS Lt. Nick Hill discussed details from the day of the shooting that were not included in the critical timeline shown to jurors late last week.
At approximately 11:31:45 a.m. on May 24, 2022, Hill cited “radio traffic” that directed an unspecified officer(s) to “go ahead and set up a perimeter as soon as you get there (to Robb Elementary School).”
Hill admitted that the 11:31:45 a.m. radio transmission was “not” included in the critical timeline.
After Hill told LaHood that he turned that information over to the state, Turner told the court it “was radio traffic we turned (to the defense) over two years ago.”
“That wasn’t my question, Judge,” LaHood said.
Presiding Judge Sid Harle then put his foot down to the state and the defense.
“OK. Let me just say this: I’m tired of the table talk,” Harle told both sides. “Objections are made to the court, not to opposing counsel. One warning. No more table talk. No more arguing back and forth. If you’ve got an objection, make it to me. Don’t look at the opposing side, opposing counsel.”
Thirty-nine minutes later, Hill shared that Gonzales — after Uvalde PD Sgt. Daniel Coronado as well as UPD officers Jesus Mendoza and Juan Saucedo arrived near the vicinity of the school — told the officers via radio transmission to “Take cover, guys. Take cover. Shots fired,” at approximately 11:32:44 a.m.
Hill said he turned the 11:32:44 a.m. radio dispatch over to the prosecution, but LaHood alleged that “none of us (the defense team) have seen that.”
“Objection, Your Honor. They’ve been provided the dispatch terms,” Turner told the court.
“No, Judge. We have not,” LaHood responded.
“They’re misleading the jury,” Turner told Harle.
“No, I’m not, Judge,” LaHood said.
LaHood then turned his attention to Turner.
“How dare you say that?” LaHood told Turner.
Harle then interjected.
“What did I just tell you?” Harle said to LaHood, in part. LaHood apologized to Harle.
Both sides rested their cases
After more than three hours of cross-examination Friday and an additional 55 minutes on the stand Tuesday morning, Hill was the prosecution’s final witness on the stand.
LaHood asked Hill if he spoke to Claudia Perez as a part of his investigation and critical timeline.
Perez, who worked at the funeral home across the street from the school on May 24, 2022, told Hill that there were “at least 10 officers positioned at the west entrance of” Robb Elementary School.
At that time, Perez and another funeral home employee ran to funeral home’s front parking lot and yelled at the officers across the street that the gunman had already entered the school.
Hill said Perez’s information recall happened at “a different time” after Coronado, Mendoza and Saucedo first arrived at the intersection of Geraldine Street and South Grove Street near the school.
The defense team also rested its case Tuesday afternoon after it called two witnesses to the stand: funeral home employee Claudia Isabel Rodriguez and law enforcement expert Willie Cantu.
Isabel Rodriguez, who didn’t want her face shown during Tuesday’s livestream, recalled the gunman opening fire at her and funeral home co-worker Cody Briseno as Briseno ran back toward the business.
On his way to the campus, she also told co-defense attorney Jason Goss the gunman took “cover … behind or on the side of a white, parked car” in the teachers’ parking lot at Robb Elementary School. Zoomed in surveillance video from the funeral home appeared to indicate that the shooter, who was dressed in black, hid between two vehicles.
Cantu discussed the school’s security measures that allowed the gunman to access the school.
“Someone in the administration should be checking those doors regularly,” Cantu said. “And then, obviously, reporting when they don’t — when they’re not locked — and report them to the principal or whatever. I’ve had to do that in certain schools where they were constantly unlocked.”
Defense team’s motions denied
Following Hill’s testimony, the state and defense teams held a hearing without the presence of the jurors.
On behalf of the defense, Goss asked the court to disregard Hill’s testimony. The defense alleged that the prosecution turned over “documents that were misleading; that did not identify our client (Gonzales).”
“These are critical issues,” Goss told Harle.
In response, Turner argued that the defense’s allegations had no merit.
“We’ve given them everything that we’ve had,” Turner said, in part. “They have told us that they didn’t even look at the portal. All they looked at was the original (Texas) Rangers’ files. … (the defense is) not being candid with the court.”
After hearing from both sides, Harle denied the defense’s motion to disqualify Hill’s testimony.
Later in the hearing, Goss asked Harle for a directed verdict. A directed verdict is a ruling when a judge would decide if the state sufficiently proved its case against a defendant/defendants without the presence of jurors.
“I’m going to overrule the motion for instructed verdict (directed verdict) at this time,” Harle said.
Closing arguments set for Wednesday
Both sides will present their closing arguments to the jury Wednesday morning.
Harle asked the state and defense if they had any time “requests” for each of their arguments.
“We have over a thousand exhibits,” Goss said. “We have weeks of testimony. Two hours (each)?”
“You think you can hold their (jurors’) attention for two hours on each side?” Harle asked Goss. “(Two hours is a) Long time.”
“I think we’ve shown that we can do that,” Goss said.
“Let’s go an hour-and-a-half,” Harle ruled. “If you go a little bit over, I won’t hold it against you. Let’s see if we can shoot for an hour-and-a-half. That’s going to be three hours with them (jurors) sitting in the box. That’s a long time.”
Jurors are expected to return to court at 9 a.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 employees at 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 to between six months and two years in a state jail.
Judge Sid Harle is the presiding judge in this case. Gonzales also elected to have Harle determine his sentence instead of the jury, if he is convicted.
More coverage of the Adrian Gonzales trial on KSAT: