No Charges Against Homeowner Who Fatally Shot Cleaner María Florinda Ríos Pérez After She Mistakenly Arrived at Wrong Home

The death of 32-year-old cleaner María Florinda Ríos Pérez in Whitestown, Indiana, has drawn widespread attention and raised difficult questions about self-defense laws and the boundaries of justified force. Pérez, a mother of four originally from Guatemala, was fatally shot on 6 November 2025 after mistakenly attempting to enter the wrong residence while arriving to begin a cleaning job.

Her husband, who was with her at the time, said they had been provided the wrong address and that she used a key intended for another home. The homeowner fired a shot through the door, striking Pérez in the head. She died in her husband’s arms moments later. More than $100,000 has since been raised through GoFundMe campaigns to support Pérez’s family and to return her remains to Guatemala, where her relatives plan for her burial.

Her family has expressed a clear desire for criminal charges, stating that her death was avoidable and unjust. However, the case has reached a complicated legal crossroads. The Boone County Coroner’s Office ruled her death a homicide—a medical designation indicating the involvement of another person in the cause of death. Yet that classification does not necessarily translate to criminal culpability.

With the case now under review by the Boone County Prosecutor’s Office, legal experts and law enforcement officials have noted that Indiana’s stand-your-ground and self-defense laws could make prosecution difficult. These laws provide broad protections for individuals who use deadly force in their homes if they believe such force is necessary to prevent an unlawful entry. The determination of whether the homeowner’s belief was “reasonable” has become the central legal question, and the answer may ultimately determine whether charges are filed.

Legal Context and Self-Defense Claims

Indiana’s self-defense laws, including its stand-your-ground provisions, allow homeowners to use deadly force if they reasonably believe that such force is necessary to prevent or stop an unlawful entry or attack on their home. Under these laws, individuals do not have a duty to retreat while inside their residence. The core legal standard is what a “reasonable person” in the same situation would have believed at the time.

Boone County Prosecutor Kent Eastwood stated that determining reasonableness requires a full examination of the circumstances leading up to the shooting. This includes whether the homeowner was aware of who was attempting to enter, whether any warnings were exchanged, and how quickly the events unfolded. Eastwood emphasized that disagreements over standards of reasonableness are increasingly common and present significant challenges for prosecutors.

The homeowner’s identity has not been released, and Whitestown Police have stated that disclosure at this point could pose safety concerns. The police have also noted that, while the coroner’s homicide designation confirms that Pérez’s death was caused by another person, it is strictly a medical classification and not a legal conclusion.

This is what grief looks like when a mother is taken away from her husband and her kids. This is Mauricio Velázquez. He's the husband of Maria Florinda Ríos Pérez, who was shot and killed on a porch in Whitestown this morning. pic.twitter.com/tbE8kgIlc4

— Jade Jackson, MBA Candidate (@IAMJADEJACKSON) November 6, 2025

For María Florinda Ríos Pérez’s family, these distinctions have been painful. Her husband, Mauricio Velazquez, told local media that he cannot understand how his wife could be viewed as a threat. He stated that they were attempting to begin a routine workday and that he had personally verified the address they were provided. Pérez used a cleaning company-issued key to try to enter the home, believing it to be the correct residence.

However, prosecutors must consider the homeowner’s perception rather than María Florinda Ríos Pérez’s intentions. If the homeowner believed someone was attempting to forcibly enter their home, and that the belief was reasonable under the circumstances, Indiana law may shield them from criminal liability. The framework of the law prioritizes the immediate perspective of the resident rather than the actual motivations of the person entering.

Community Response and Fundraising Efforts

The response to María Florinda Ríos Pérez’s death has been marked by grief and support from both local residents and individuals across the country. Two fundraising campaigns have collectively raised over $100,000 to assist her family. The funds are intended to support her four children, cover funeral expenses, and facilitate the return of her remains to Guatemala.

Her brother, Rudy Rojas, described her as a hardworking and dedicated mother who was committed to supporting her family. He stated that she had come to the United States in search of economic stability and had worked consistently to provide for her children. Family members and friends have spoken publicly to remember her as responsible, caring, and devoted to her household.

Read : 19-Year-Old Darryl Lee Jr. Stabs Delivery Driver and Maintenance Worker at Illinois Chick-fil-A

Rojas said that the family hopes for legal accountability, stating that the circumstances of her death were deeply unfair. He described his sister’s intention on the day of the shooting as routine work, not an act of threat, and expressed disbelief that such a situation could result in fatal violence. Her husband reiterated similar sentiments, describing his wife’s death as a tragedy that has left their children without a mother. He said he hopes that the legal system will acknowledge the value of her life and the circumstances of her death.

Community discussions have been shaped by broader debates about stand-your-ground laws and their varied applications. Some local residents have expressed sympathy for both the homeowner and Pérez’s family, stating that the incident reflects the difficulties individuals face when confronting unexpected and unfamiliar situations. Others have questioned whether lethal force was necessary in this case, given that Pérez did not attempt to enter forcibly and had arrived during daylight hours to conduct her job.

Review Process and Possible Outcomes

The Boone County Prosecutor’s Office has begun its review of the case but has not indicated when a charging decision will be made. Prosecutors must examine all investigative findings, including forensic details, witness statements, and 911 records. The office must determine whether the homeowner’s fear of unlawful entry was justified and whether the action taken was proportionate within the scope of Indiana law.

The complexity of this determination arises from the legal emphasis on the homeowner’s belief. Even if María Florinda Ríos Pérez posed no actual threat, the legal question focuses on whether the homeowner reasonably perceived one. This distinction has played a central role in numerous stand-your-ground and self-defense-related cases across the United States, where circumstances often unfold rapidly and with incomplete information.

Prosecutors must also consider the broader implications of their decision. Charging in cases where self-defense claims are legally protected could be seen as undermining statutory protections, while declining to charge may be seen as insufficiently recognizing the loss of life. The investigation includes an evaluation of timeline details, actions taken by both María Florinda Ríos Pérez and her husband at the scene, and any communications between the homeowner and emergency services. The process may continue for several weeks or longer, depending on the availability of final reports and any additional investigative steps deemed necessary.

While the legal analysis continues, Pérez’s family remains focused on preparing for her burial and supporting her children. The fundraising campaigns note that she will be remembered by her family as someone who worked diligently for their future. The public conversation surrounding the case continues to evolve, shaped by legal considerations, community responses, and reflections on the event’s impact on those involved.