San Bernardino, CA
Today, San Diego civil rights firm McKenzie Scott filed a government tort claim against the County of San Bernardino on behalf of the Serna family, whose beloved Rottweiler, Daisy, was shot and killed by a San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department (“SBSD”) deputy who entered their fenced backyard without a warrant on May 4, 2026. The claim is the formal first step required before the family files a federal civil-rights lawsuit.
Home security footage shows the deputy entered the family’s fenced backyard — without a warrant — at approximately 11:55 a.m., while purportedly investigating a stolen vehicle that was parked nearby and had nothing to do with the home. The deputy knew at least one dog was present; two doghouses and food bowls sat in plain view just inside the chain-link fence. When Daisy approached and barked, the deputy drew his firearm, tried to kick her, and shot her at nearly point-blank range — even though an open gate was immediately behind him.
The family’s ordeal did not end there. Daisy did not die immediately. Rather than render or summon aid, multiple deputies continued onto the property — a subsequent, warrantless entry — and spent roughly twenty minutes locating and removing the spent shell casing while Daisy bled to death. One deputy can be heard on video remarking, “I think he’s [Daisy] dead now,” while poking her body with a baton; another is heard joking about “kill[ing] the f***ing dog.” Daisy’s body was then taken without the owners’ permission and destroyed before the family could retrieve it, and the family’s surviving dog, Raven, was allowed to escape and was impounded at an animal shelter.
“We are filing this claim today because the County must answer for what its deputy did — and because Daisy was not the first family pet San Bernardino deputies have shot or tased after letting themselves onto private property,” said San Diego civil rights attorney Tim Scott, lead counsel for the Serna family. “This is a pattern, and the law has forbidden it for decades.”
The claim alleges that the killing of Daisy reflects a recurring practice within the Sheriff’s Department. In June 2016, deputies who went to the wrong home in Hesperia on a domestic-disturbance call shot and killed an eleven-year-old family dog. In August 2023, deputies who entered a Victorville home on a 911 hang-up call shot a family dog three times. And in January 2026, deputies executing an eviction in Hinkley tased two contained dogs — killing one. The claim asserts that the County failed to train, supervise, and discipline its deputies regarding the constitutional limits on entering private property and using deadly force against animals.
The claim also comes in the wake of two similar, high-profile California police shootings involving dogs, demonstrating a troubling statewide pattern of misconduct. On June 13, 2026, Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers responded to a noise complaint about a woman screaming, but the owner was actually celebrating in excitement over the New York Knicks winning the NBA Finals. When the owner opened her apartment door, Jameson, a dog wearing a Knicks shirt, was at her side barking. Officers asked her to put the dog away. When she reopened the door, the dog moved towards an officer, who fired multiple fatal shots. The body-worn camera footage has sparked outrage among Angelenos and animal lovers worldwide.
Additionally, on June 15, 2026, a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer shot and killed a family’s German Shepherd – Silver – while responding to a report of a dilapidated RV blocking a Fresno road, allegedly creating a traffic hazard. The officer fired “multiple shots,” but the CHP has failed to confirm how many. Silver’s owner, Rachael Bethel, asserts that the dog was never aggressive, and often spent time with her brother (who is non-verbal). Bethel is demanding the officer’s body-worn camera footage, which has yet to be released.
The three police-involved shootings of California dogs in recent weeks highlight a pattern of officer misconduct and insufficient training practices.
“This [Serna] family learned that their dog had not simply been shot, but left to bleed out and die by a deputy who had no business being in their yard in the first place,” Scott added. “Daisy’s death, the destruction of her remains without permission, and the County’s misleading public statements afterward were violations of our clients’ constitutional rights and a profound violation of the community’s trust.”
Federal courts have clearly established that shooting a family pet can constitute an unconstitutional seizure under the Fourth Amendment. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has recognized that “the emotional attachment to a family’s dog” is fundamentally different than mere property, and that officers who know dogs are present on a property must develop a plan to deal with them without resorting to lethal force. California law also provides for emotional-distress damages when an owner’s pet is killed or injured by an intentional or grossly negligent act, and separately when a pet’s remains are misappropriated.
About McKenzie Scott PC
McKenzie Scott is a San Diego civil rights law firm dedicated to protecting individual liberties and holding government entities accountable. The firm specializes in civil rights violation cases, including police misconduct, First Amendment rights, in-custody jail deaths, civil liberties, and public interest litigation. McKenzie Scott’s attorneys have successfully represented numerous families in excessive force and wrongful death cases against law enforcement agencies, including securing the then-largest excessive-force verdict in American history ($85 million in K.J.P. v. San Diego) and the largest wrongful death settlement paid by the County in San Diego County’s history ($16 million in the Hayden Schuck case).
For more information, please visit www.mckenziescott.com.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Jason Kitchen
McKenzie Scott PC
1350 Columbia Street, Suite 600, San Diego, CA 92101
C: (517) 974-4724 | O: (619) 794-0451
