Attorney General James’ Office of Special Investigation Releases Report on Death of Allan Hoad

NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James’ Office of Special Investigation (OSI) today released its report on the death of Allan Hoad, who died on October 21, 2024 following an encounter with members of the Steuben County Sheriff’s Office (SCSO) and the City of Corning Police Department (CCPD) in Cameron, Steuben County. After a thorough investigation, which included review of footage from body-worn cameras and a drone, interviews with witnesses and officers, review of written statements from involved officers, and comprehensive legal analysis, OSI concluded that a prosecutor would not be able to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that the officers’ actions were justified under New York law.

During the early morning hours of October 21, SCSO deputies responded to a 911 call requesting a welfare check for Mr. Hoad at a residence on Angel Road in Cameron. When officers arrived, they attempted to speak with Mr. Hoad, who twice fired a shotgun at officers. A 13-hour standoff ensued, during which Mr. Hoad repeatedly threated to kill police officers and others in calls with 911 operators and SCSO crisis negotiators.

At 2 p.m. on October 21, Mr. Hoad left the residence carrying a long gun and drove his truck through a field to a house on Swale Road. Officers again attempted to get Mr. Hoad to surrender, using their cars to block the roadway. Mr. Hoad then drove his truck in reverse toward the officers with what appeared to be a handgun in his hand and crashed into a patrol car. Officers discharged their service weapons as Mr. Hoad drove at them and got out of his truck, striking Mr. Hoad. Mr. Hoad was transferred to a local hospital where he was later pronounced dead. Officers recovered a shotgun and three imitation pistols in Mr. Hoad’s truck at the scene.

Under New York’s justification law, a police officer may use deadly physical force when the officer reasonably believes it to be necessary to defend against the use of deadly physical force by another. In this case, officers responded to a welfare call and were fired upon, then repeatedly attempted to engage Mr. Hoad as he threatened to kill them and others before he eventually drove his vehicle toward officers while pointing a gun at them. Under these circumstances, given the law and the evidence, a prosecutor would not be able to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that the officers’ use of deadly physical force against Mr. Hoad was justified, and therefore OSI determined that criminal charges would not be pursued in this matter.