Former Uvalde school police chief Pete Arredondo is due back in a Texas courtroom on Friday, where a judge will consider whether his criminal trial should be moved out of Uvalde and whether the proceedings must be delayed because U.S. Customs and Border Protection has not cooperated with the case.
Arredondo was charged in 2024 with 10 counts of endangering students, tied to allegations that he failed to respond quickly during the 2022 mass shooting at Robb Elementary School. The case has been held up by two ongoing civil lawsuits aimed at compelling testimony from members of the Border Patrol Tactical Unit, the CBP team involved in confronting and killing the gunman.
The attack on Robb Elementary unfolded on May 24, 2022, the last day of school. Nineteen students and two teachers were killed when a former student opened fire inside the school.
Prosecutors say Arredondo, who was in charge of the law enforcement response, failed to follow his training by waiting roughly 77 minutes before officers entered the classroom where the shooter was located. The delay ended only when federal agents stormed the room and killed the gunman.
The upcoming hearing comes months after another closely watched outcome in the Uvalde cases. Earlier this year, former school police officer Adrian Gonzales was acquitted on similar charges following a three-week trial.
That verdict drew anger and heartbreak from families of the victims, some of whom now see Arredondo’s case as another chance to pursue accountability.
Arredondo has pleaded not guilty, arguing he followed his training and saying he did not consider himself as the incident commander that day, though investigators said he was just that. Arredondo’s attorney Paul Looney told ABC News that he believes the case against Arredondo is weaker than the failed prosecution of Gonzales.
“They tried the one they thought that they had the best shot at, but now they’re going to put everything they’ve got into doing this one, because they do want to win at least something,” Looney said.
RELATED: Uvalde trial: Former school police officer Adrian Gonzales found not guilty on all counts
Friday’s status conference comes as Judge Sid Harle weighs the future of the case. The judge has said he wants to determine how the trial against Arredondo can proceed amid the ongoing litigation with CBP and whether — as in the case of Gonzales — the trial ought to be moved out of Uvalde.
Both Uvalde District Attorney Christina Mitchell and Arredondo filed federal lawsuits to compel the federal agents to cooperate with investigators and potentially testify at trial.
“The three border patrol agents whose cooperation is now being sought by District Attorney Mitchell — two of whom participated in the actual killing of the gunman and the third who was present in the hallway during most of the incident — are essential to the pending Texas criminal prosecution,” Mitchell wrote in her lawsuit.
CBP attorneys have argued that the request for testimony is unreasonable, unnecessary and “negatively impacts CBP operations and national security” by taking up resources and potentially disclosing sensitive information.
Attorneys have argued that CBP revealed enough information through the investigative summaries prepared by the Texas Rangers and a report released by CBP’s Office of Professional Responsibility.
“It is unclear from your request how testimony from the identified CBP employees is genuinely necessary to the proceedings,” an attorney for CBP said in a court filing.
Earlier this year, a new judge was assigned to the lawsuit filed by Mitchell, and this week she filed a motion to schedule a status conference in that case. Looney, who filed a separate lawsuit largely mirroring the District Attorney’s, said he anticipates the litigation will take another eight months to a year.
Friday’s hearing will be held in Uvalde, though the trial of Gonzales was held in Corpus Christi to find an impartial jury, due to the widespread impact of the shooting on the Uvalde community.
Arredondo’s lawyer said he expects Harle to grant his motion for a venue change, though he claimed there is “no sense of urgency” to resolve the venue issue while the case remains stalled by the ongoing civil litigation.
Copyright © 2026 ABC News Internet Ventures.
