The three-day dismissal hearing in the murder case against former Okaloosa County Sheriff’s Deputy Eddie Duran concluded Wednesday without a ruling, as defense attorneys argued they had met the legal requirements for immunity under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law and asked the court to dismiss the case.
Rather than rule from the bench, Circuit Judge Lacey Powell Clark ordered both sides to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by Aug. 14 before deciding whether Duran will stand trial in the May 3, 2024 shooting death of Hurlburt Field Senior Airman Roger Fortson.
The final day of testimony centered on the defense’s fourth and final expert witness, who testified that Duran’s actions were consistent with accepted law enforcement firearms training before attorney Rod Smith argued prosecutors failed to overcome the defense’s claim of lawful self-defense.
Fourth Expert Says Duran Followed Training
The witness testified that Deputy Eddie Duran’s actions during the May 3, 2024 shooting of Roger Fortson were consistent with law enforcement firearms training and reasonable under the circumstances. Okaloosa Court TV carried the hearing live.
The defense’s final expert witness, a retired Orlando Police Department firearms instructor and use-of-force trainer, testified that Duran’s response to Fortson was consistent with nationally accepted law enforcement training for close-quarters armed encounters.
The witness detailed decades of experience as a firearms instructor, range master and trainer, including certifications through the SIG Sauer Academy and responsibility for training officers on when deadly force is appropriate.
After reviewing Duran’s training records, agency policies, body-worn camera footage, investigative materials and the apartment’s layout, the expert testified that Duran reasonably believed he was responding to a dangerous domestic violence call.
He told the court officers are trained to avoid standing directly in front of doors, describing the doorway as a “fatal funnel” where officers are especially vulnerable to attack.
The witness said Duran’s decision to move away from the center of the doorway, observe the apartment before announcing himself, and evaluate Fortson’s hands as the door opened were all consistent with accepted patrol tactics.
He also testified that the confined hallway left Duran with little room to retreat or seek cover.
The expert rejected the suggestion that Duran should have relied on a Taser, explaining that Tasers require adequate distance to deploy effectively and have significantly higher failure rates than firearms during rapidly evolving encounters.
Based on his review of the evidence, the witness testified that Duran’s use of deadly force was reasonable and consistent with both his training and accepted police practices.
During cross-examination, Assistant State Attorney Mark Alderman questioned the witness about his compensation, his review of the Sheriff’s Office Internal Affairs investigation, and whether knocking without immediately announcing police carries tactical drawbacks.
The witness acknowledged there can be disadvantages but maintained that Duran’s actions remained consistent with accepted law enforcement training.
Smith: Defense Established Stand Your Ground Immunity
Following testimony, Gainesville trial attorney Rod Smith urged the court to dismiss the murder charge, arguing the defense had established a prima facie claim of immunity under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.
Smith argued that over three days of testimony, the defense presented evidence showing Duran reasonably believed deadly force was necessary when Fortson opened the apartment door holding a firearm during what Duran believed was an active domestic violence investigation.
According to Smith, once the defense established that initial showing, Florida law shifted the burden to prosecutors to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Duran was not entitled to immunity.
Smith argued the State failed to meet that burden.
He noted that the defense presented testimony from Duran and four expert witnesses whose opinions consistently supported the conclusion that Duran acted reasonably under the circumstances.
After the defense rested, prosecutors did not call any rebuttal witnesses before the parties moved into closing arguments.
Smith argued that the evidence presented throughout the hearing demonstrated Duran’s actions were objectively reasonable based on what he knew at the time—not on information learned after the shooting.
He urged the court to dismiss the murder charge before trial.
No Immediate Ruling
Rather than rule Wednesday, Judge Clark instructed both sides to submit written proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law by Aug. 14, along with proposed orders.
After reviewing those submissions, the court will decide whether Duran is immune from prosecution under Florida’s Stand Your Ground law or whether the murder case will proceed to trial.
As always, Mid Bay News will be here covering this case from the courtroom and bringing you updates as this legal process continues.
