For years, the death of Kenny Mullins sat quietly in the background of Fresno County. A homeless man, shot and killed by reserve deputies in 2020, his case didn’t spark the level of official criticism or investigation you might expect. The Sheriff’s Office denied wrongdoing, the District Attorney kept silent, and even the FBI didn’t weigh in publicly. But four years later, the tide has shifted. A federal judge has now ruled that the deputies involved, Chris Curtice and Alex Riordan, will stand trial.
This ruling allows a jury to decide whether Mullins’ civil rights were violated and whether excessive force was used. For the family of Kenny Mullins, especially his young daughter, this is the first chance at a public examination of what really happened.
A Life Cut Short
Kenny Mullins grew up in Selma, attending Kingsburg High and working in jobs that rarely make headlines but are essential to California’s farming economy. He cooked at diners, moved boxes in packing sheds, repaired machinery, and labored in nut and citrus companies. His friends and family describe him as part of the invisible workforce that kept the valley moving. He also cared deeply for his father after a stroke and loved spending time fishing with him and their dog, Duke. Above all, he was a father, devoted to his daughter Kayla.
Life took a difficult turn. Over the years, run-ins with the law, from DUI to property crimes, and struggles with schizophrenia pushed Kenny to the margins. By 2020, as the pandemic began to close doors everywhere, he was one of more than 3,000 unhoused people in Fresno County. That March, he found shelter inside Jamie’s Auto Dismantling, a wrecking yard southwest of Fresno. He made food, had a drink, and fell asleep on a sofa. What happened after he woke up would end his life.
From Trespassing to Tragedy
The lawsuit filed on behalf of his daughter argues that deputies escalated what should have been a minor trespass case into a deadly confrontation. They claim Mullins never held a gun, never threatened deputies, and never posed a danger. Tools of de-escalation, pepper spray, stun guns, or even patience, were available but not used.
Instead, deputies Curtice and Riordan arrived armed with a rifle and a handgun. They were told about shotguns in the office, though accounts differ on whether they knew none were loaded. A dispatch log only referenced shotguns, yet both deputies later suggested they believed Mullins could have had “other firearms.” That assumption shaped how they approached him, but no weapon was ever found on Mullins or near him after he died.
The Fatal Encounter
When deputies reached the wrecking yard, Mullins was ordered to come out with his hands raised. After some time, he stepped outside. Accounts vary. Some deputies said he meandered away, hands at his sides. Curtice and Riordan claimed he turned toward them as if in a shooting stance. Another deputy watching from a distance said he saw Mullins raise his hands at chest level, not threateningly, but as if he was responding to commands.
What’s clear is that no warnings of deadly force were given. Curtice fired once and missed. Seconds later, both deputies fired again. Mullins was hit in the head and thigh. He died there, 32 years old.
Nobody captured the moment with body cameras, which Fresno County deputies only began using in 2024. The lack of video leaves conflicting testimony as the primary evidence, with deputies saying one thing, another deputy saying something else, and the absence of a weapon casting doubt.
The Legal Road Ahead
Judge Kirk Sherriff’s ruling makes it clear that a jury has serious disputes to weigh. Did Mullins pose a threat, or was he trying to comply? Did deputies have reason to think he had a gun, or did assumptions drive their actions? Were less-lethal options ignored?
The court also denied “qualified immunity,” the legal shield often protecting officers from civil liability. That means a jury could hold Curtice and Riordan accountable for civil rights violations, wrongful death, and negligence. Curtice, the one who fired the fatal shots, could even face punitive damages if jurors find his actions showed reckless disregard for life.
This isn’t the first time the Sheriff’s Office has faced civil scrutiny. Earlier this year, it paid $2 million to a couple after deputies entered their home without a warrant and killed their dog. In that case, like Mullins’, officials had long denied wrongdoing until the court process forced a settlement.
Remembering the Man
In legal battles, it’s easy to lose sight of the person at the center. Kenny was more than his criminal record or his homelessness. He was a son who cared for his father, a worker who took whatever job kept him afloat, and a dad whose daughter now grows up without him. The lawsuit brought by his family doesn’t just seek damages; it seeks recognition that his life mattered and that it should not have ended the way it did.
Why This Case Matters
What happened to Kenny Mullins is not only about one man and two deputies. It highlights bigger questions about how law enforcement handles vulnerable people — especially those living with mental illness or homelessness. Was deadly force vital? Were the deputies trained and equipped to de-escalate? Could another outcome have been possible if body cameras had been in place, or if less-lethal weapons had been used?
The trial will not undo what happened, but it will finally bring public scrutiny to a death that, until now, sat quietly in sealed files and silent offices. For Kenny’s family and a community that has waited years for answers, the courtroom may finally deliver what has been missing: accountability.
Closing Thoughts
At the end of the day, this case is about a man whose life ended too soon and a justice system that is only now catching up. Whether the jury finds the deputies liable or not, the trial forces us to confront a hard truth: Kenny Mullins walked out of that warehouse unarmed, and he never walked back.
Do you need legal help? Well, then you’ve come to the right place! Contact the attorneys at The Wagner Law Group for a consultation today!