Authorities say a gun threat call near a neighborhood park led deputies to four teens, a chase and a shooting now under state investigation.
MIAMI, FL — Two South Florida teens were arrested after a Miami-Dade sheriff’s deputy shot and wounded a 15-year-old boy during a confrontation in the Goulds area Thursday afternoon, authorities said, after deputies were called to investigate reports of threats involving a gun near a park.
The shooting put a neighborhood already shaken by police tape and patrol cars at the center of two separate inquiries: a criminal case against the teens and a deputy-involved shooting investigation being handled by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. Miami-Dade sheriff’s officials say one teen pointed a gun at a deputy after running from officers. Relatives of the boy who was shot sharply dispute that account and say deputies arrived in unmarked vehicles and opened fire without clearly identifying themselves.
According to the Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office, the chain of events began at about 3:34 p.m. Thursday, when South District deputies were sent to the area of Southwest 113th Avenue and Southwest 216th Street after a report of threats with a firearm. The call centered on JL and Enid W. Demps Park, a neighborhood park in southwest Miami-Dade. Deputies were given a description of the people involved and spread out through the surrounding blocks looking for them. Officials said deputies then found several males matching the description near Southwest 112th Court and Southwest 221st Street, a short distance from the park. Assistant Sheriff Fernand Charles Jr. later described what followed in brief terms, saying, “A confrontation ensued.” The sheriff’s office said one of the youths brandished a firearm, and one deputy fired a service weapon, grazing the 15-year-old in the ankle. Miami-Dade Fire Rescue took him to Jackson South Medical Center, where officials said he was in stable condition.
By Friday, the sheriff’s office had publicly identified the wounded boy as Cournelious Lamont Comer, 15, and another teen as Phil Phillips, 17. Comer was listed as facing aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer with a firearm, possession of a firearm by a minor and resisting an officer without violence. Phillips was listed as facing tampering with physical evidence while armed, carrying a concealed firearm, possession of a firearm by a minor and resisting an officer without violence. A local report, citing arrest paperwork, said investigators accused Comer of running from deputies with a gun, tripping, rolling onto his back and pointing the weapon toward the pursuing deputy. That same report said the deputy fired because he feared for his life. Authorities also said investigators recovered a firearm near Comer after the shooting and that another gun was later found after the second teen ran into a nearby home. One television report said a search warrant led deputies to two handguns in a hallway closet. Officials have not publicly said whether prosecutors will seek to charge either teen as an adult, and court records available immediately after the arrests were limited because both suspects are juveniles.
The case quickly turned into a test of two competing narratives, one from law enforcement and one from the boy’s relatives. Sheriff’s officials have said the shooting followed a gun threat call, the teens matched the descriptions given to deputies and at least one gun was recovered at the scene. Family members, standing near the taped-off area after the shooting, said they did not believe the young people had fired at deputies and questioned the way the encounter unfolded. Asia Spann, identified in local coverage as the wounded teen’s aunt, said she wanted to know why deputies “came in unknown cars” and “just start shooting.” Another relative, Darrell Collins, said the teen who was shot was his cousin and insisted the boys were not known for getting into trouble. Keisha Williams, whose son was among the youths stopped by deputies, said she was upset by the way the children were handled. Those objections do not settle what happened in the crucial seconds before the deputy fired, and investigators have not yet publicly released body camera footage, surveillance video, witness interviews or forensic findings that could support or undercut either side’s account.
The setting matters in this case because it helps explain both the speed of the police response and the questions that followed. The initial call came in the middle of the afternoon, while children and families would normally still be moving through the area after school. Sheriff’s officials pointed to that timing as a sign of how serious they considered the reported threat. Charles said the agency was grateful nobody else was hurt and used the case to underscore the danger of minors carrying guns in a neighborhood park area. Investigators said one of the weapons tied to the case had been reported stolen last July, an added detail that may become important as detectives trace how the gun moved into the hands of a teenager. At the same time, the scene described by witnesses was not a closed crime scene at the outset but a residential stretch near the park, where relatives and neighbors said they were left trying to piece together what had happened from sirens, shouted commands and the sight of young people in handcuffs. That mix of a public safety call, fleeing suspects and a fast-moving encounter is likely to remain central as state agents reconstruct the event step by step.
The legal path ahead is split between the criminal charges and the independent review of the deputy’s use of force. In Florida, state or local agencies commonly ask the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate deputy-involved shootings, and the Miami-Dade Sheriff’s Office said FDLE is handling that part of the case. That means outside investigators will gather evidence, review the deputy’s account, examine weapons, map the positions of everyone involved and submit findings for prosecutors and law enforcement leadership to review. Separately, the charges against Comer and Phillips will move through juvenile court unless prosecutors decide to seek adult charges based on the allegations and the ages of the suspects. The sheriff’s office said there were no other reported injuries, and as of the latest public update, the wounded boy had been treated after the bullet grazed his ankle. What remains unknown includes whether any of the other two youths initially stopped with Comer and Phillips face charges, whether body-worn camera footage will be released and whether additional counts could be filed once detectives finish reviewing the physical evidence and interviews.
On the block where the confrontation ended, neighbors and relatives were left talking about fear, confusion and the sight of another juvenile case turning violent in broad daylight. The sheriff’s office released only a brief official account at first, then followed with names and charges a day later, a sequence that often happens when investigators try to sort out facts before identifying minors. In the hours after the shooting, television crews captured family members asking why the encounter escalated so quickly. Spann’s questions centered on identification and whether deputies made clear who they were before the gunfire. Law enforcement officials, meanwhile, pointed to what they described as an armed teen and a split-second decision by a deputy during a foot chase. Those details are likely to shape public reaction more than the charges alone, because the case is not only about whether the teens broke the law. It is also about whether the deputy’s response matched the danger at that exact moment. Until investigators release more evidence, those answers remain incomplete.
As of Sunday, both teens had been identified and charged, the 15-year-old had been reported in stable condition after treatment for a graze wound, and FDLE was continuing its investigation. The next major milestone is the release of additional investigative findings, including any court action on the juvenile charges and any public update from state agents or the sheriff’s office.
Author note: Last updated April 5, 2026.