A Laredo police officer arrested on a felony domestic violence charge has been suspended for 90 days without pay following an internal investigation that concluded his conduct violated department standards. The disciplinary action was imposed despite the fact that the criminal case had not been formally dismissed by the Webb County District Attorney’s Office at the time the suspension was issued. Records show the suspension took effect December 10, 2025, and was set to run through March 9, 2026. The decision was made by Police Chief Miguel A. Rodriguez Jr. after reviewing the findings of an administrative investigation into the incident.

Arrest followed domestic disturbance involving both parties

As previously reported, the case stems from a June 30, 2025 domestic disturbance at a residence in the 3800 block of Daffodil. According to the Laredo Police Department, officers responded to the scene at approximately 12:44 p.m. after receiving a report of a physical altercation. Upon arrival, officers found that Daniel Mendez, 28, and Margarita Mendez, 25, had been involved in an argument that escalated into a physical confrontation. Authorities noted that both individuals displayed visible injuries consistent with a recent altercation.

After assessing the situation and consulting with the Webb County District Attorney’s Office, officers determined there was probable cause to pursue charges against both individuals. Daniel Mendez was arrested and charged with assault on a pregnant person, a second-degree felony under Texas law. Margarita Mendez was charged with assault family violence, though she was not immediately taken into custody due to being transported to a hospital for observation. A warrant was later issued in connection with her charges. The department initially placed Mendez on administrative duties pending both the criminal and internal investigations.

Internal investigation cites body camera footage and conflicting accounts

The administrative investigation, as outlined in the suspension records, relied on officer reports, body camera footage, and statements provided by both individuals involved in the incident. According to the findings, both Mendez and his spouse contacted law enforcement for assistance, indicating the situation had escalated beyond a verbal dispute. Responding officers documented visible injuries on Mendez’s face and chest, while his spouse reported experiencing pain and alleged that she had been assaulted. Based on those observations and statements, officers determined that the incident met the criteria for family violence involving both parties.

During the internal affairs process, Mendez provided a detailed account of how the altercation unfolded inside the home. He stated that the argument began while he was washing dishes and escalated over a disagreement involving electronic devices. According to his statement, the situation turned physical when both individuals began struggling over one of the devices. Mendez told investigators that during that struggle, the device broke, which he characterized as accidental and not the result of intentional force.  Mendez denied intentionally assaulting his spouse and maintained that any injuries sustained were unintentional and occurred during the physical struggle over the device. He asserted that his spouse initiated physical contact and that his actions were reactive rather than aggressive. 

Complaint withdrawals filed, but no formal dismissal at time of discipline

Records show that following the incident, both Mendez and his spouse went to the district attorney’s office and signed complaint withdrawals, indicating they did not wish to pursue criminal charges against one another. However, the suspension narrative makes clear that these withdrawals did not result in an immediate dismissal of the case. At the time the department finalized its disciplinary decision, the charges against Mendez were still pending review by prosecutors. The district attorney’s office had not issued a formal decision to drop or proceed with the case.

Mendez is considered innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.

---

---

Disclaimer

The content provided in this publication is for educational and informational purposes only. The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News strives to deliver accurate and impactful stories. However, readers are advised to seek professional legal counsel and guidance for their specific legal inquiries and concerns. The publication does not assume any responsibility for actions taken by individuals based on the information presented. 

Additionally, while every effort is made to ensure the reliability of the information, the publication does not warrant the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of the content. Readers are encouraged to verify any legal information with official sources and to use their discretion when interpreting and applying the information provided.

A Couple of Our Other Reads

You may be interested in our publishing about a Texas judge filing a lawsuit over same-sex wedding refusals.

Or you may find our publishing on a TABC agent receiving a stipend for a degree he didn’t hold, of interest. 

Follow Us on Social Media

If you are interested in staying updated on matters about your government in Texas and other important stories, trust The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News to provide reliable information that matters to you. You can follow us on social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, X, Reddit, YouTube, Tumblr, and LinkedIn to stay connected and informed.

FACEBOOK: TheHawksEyeNews
INSTAGRAM: Hawk_s_Eye_C_and_N
X: TheHawksEyeNews
REDDIT: TheHawksEyeCN
YOUTUBE: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
TUMBLR: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News
LINKEDIN: The Hawk’s Eye – Consulting & News

---