Two brothers, one of whom owned the car at the center of a chaotic early‑morning car theft and shooting, are now charged with second‑degree assault with a dangerous weapon, according to newly filed search‑warrant affidavits and police records.
The incident left two teenagers wounded and three people facing charges.
The charges stem from an April 2 incident that began around 1:14 a.m., when a woman on the 3500 block of Colfax Avenue North called 911 to report that unknown suspects were attempting to steal her boyfriend’s car, a vehicle registered to 23‑year‑old Ronald Gonzalez Cedillo.
In the background of the call, investigators say male voices sounded angry, and the caller asked “Ronald” for the license plate number as the theft unfolded. Moments later, she told the dispatcher the suspects “took off,” adding in frustration that this “isn’t even the first time” that “these little mother******* come and do this s***.”
Within minutes, other callers reported hearing gunfire and a male yelling “ow.” Officers later recovered two types of cartridge casings, 9mm and .40 caliber, from the street and the front lawn. Investigators noted that when they returned later that morning, residents were raking the yard in freezing rain, something they described as “extremely uncommon” and suggesting the residents “were searching for evidence of the shooting to conceal.”
Shortly after the gunfire, the stolen car arrived at North Memorial Medical Center, where two juveniles, ages 14 and 16, got out and sought treatment for gunshot wounds. One teen had a bullet wound through his upper lip; the other had a gunshot wound to his lower back, with the bullet traveling toward his chest. The vehicle that dropped them off immediately left the hospital.
Robbinsdale police later spotted the stolen car and attempted a stop. Dash‑camera video shows officers trying to catch up to the speeding driver before the car crashed into a ditch in Fridley. The driver, 20‑year‑old Nazarye Singleton, was arrested and charged in connection with stealing the car. He denied knowing anything about the shooting or how the teens got to the hospital.
Investigators say the gunfire came from the people who lived at the home where the car was stolen. 27‑year‑old Edwin Cedillo Martinez and 23‑year‑old Cedillo are charged with second‑degree assault with a dangerous weapon for allegedly shooting at the teens as they fled in the stolen car.
A search warrant affidavit says Martinez told investigators he woke up, saw “2 to 3 people at his brother’s car,” and went outside to confront them. The affidavit states he continued firing as the suspects drove away in his brother’s vehicle. He said his brother, Cedillo, came outside to “provide backup.” Investigators say shell casings recovered at the scene show shots were fired from two different locations, consistent with two shooters.
Security video from across the street shows a man in a black hooded sweatshirt and white shorts standing on the sidewalk with both arms extended in a shooting position, firing toward the fleeing car. A second man in red shorts, shirtless, is seen walking with what appears to be a light‑colored handgun in a two‑handed grip.
The affidavit states that the evidence “is not consistent with the suspects having a reasonable claim of self defense in this shooting.” Police say the brothers never reported being threatened with a weapon, and no firearm was found in the stolen car. ShotSpotter recorded five rounds, and investigators noted the audio “does not sound like a gunfight.”
Attorney’s perspective on use of force
Criminal defense attorney Jack Rice says Minnesota law draws a sharp line between protecting people and protecting property.
“The real problem with property crimes is that they’re not about a threat to a person, they’re about a threat to a piece of property,” Rice said. “You can only use deadly force if you’re being threatened. You can’t use deadly force to protect a car, to protect a house, to protect something else.”
Rice said the law does allow self‑defense if the suspect uses the vehicle as a weapon or appears to be driving toward someone.
“If they use that car as a weapon, or what you perceive to be a weapon, then you have the right to defend yourself,” he said. “But if your response is, ‘I’m going to stop them from stealing my car by shooting them,’ where’s the threat? There is no threat to self at that point.”
He emphasized how quickly a homeowner can go from victim to suspect.
“This is a situation where it can be extraordinarily scary,” Rice said. “Imagine it’s the middle of the night and somebody is trying to steal something from you. How threatened will you be? You can be threatened very, very quickly.”
But he said fear alone isn’t enough; prosecutors must determine whether the fear was reasonable.
“They have to decide whether there was a sufficient threat, or whether you could actually be charged.”
Rice said many people may feel instinctively that shooting at someone stealing their car is justified, but the law doesn’t work that way.
“You can always get a new car if you have insurance,” he said. “But if you overreact, you could be injured or killed, or you could be charged.”
He also explained how the legal consequences escalate when someone is hit.
“If nobody is injured, you might get off with a warning,” Rice said. “But when someone is shot, now you end up at the hospital, you have records, and there’s pressure on the county. They can’t just let people start shooting at others because they were taking their stuff.”
Depending on the circumstances, he said, charges could be even more serious.
“If they die, you could be facing manslaughter or even second‑degree murder. This can get really bad, really fast,” he said.
Rice said the key legal distinction is whether the shooter was defending themselves or retaliating.
“You have to figure out if it’s about stopping them from doing something you don’t want them to do, versus actually defending yourself because they’re coming at you,” he said. “When you go from the defensive to the offensive, that’s where prosecutors turn this around and say, ‘You’re not the victim now, you are the victimizer.’”
Both juveniles survived their injuries. Police executed multiple search warrants, including at the Colfax Avenue home and at the workplace, where Cedillo’s backpack containing a firearm was seized.
According to the criminal complaint, Martinez faces a maximum sentence of seven years in prison, with a mandatory minimum of three years because a firearm was used.
According to the affidavit, investigators were seeking evidence to “prove or disprove that firearms owned by the suspects were in fact the firearms used in the shooting of the victims,” and it remains unclear which gun fired which shots.
5 EYEWITNESS NEWS asked MPD whether the case involving the juveniles will be submitted for charges; we are still waiting for a response.
