Two Dominican nationals who entered the United States legally now face green card revocation after being charged in a fatal home invasion that left a 69-year-old Connecticut man dead and his wife fighting to recover from a gunshot wound to the head.
The Department of Homeland Security announced Thursday that it is seeking to strip lawful permanent resident status from Ivan Antonio Barias-Florimon, 24, and Stuar Jose Lopez-Reyes, 25, both charged in the June 3 attack at a beach house in Milford, Connecticut. Fredrick Werner, 69, died of multiple gunshot wounds. His wife, whose name has not been released, was hospitalized with a gunshot wound to the head and was still recovering at the time of the announcement.
DHS labeled both men "criminal aliens", a designation that carries legal weight beyond the rhetorical punch. The agency made clear it views green card revocation not as an extraordinary measure but as a straightforward application of existing law.
The immigration histories of both suspects raise pointed questions about how the system processed their cases. Lopez-Reyes entered the country on a visa in November 2016, during the final months of the Obama administration. In 2021, he was arrested on charges of criminal mischief and criminal obstruction of breathing, a charge that in many jurisdictions describes choking or strangulation. He was ultimately convicted of disorderly conduct, a lesser offense.
That conviction did not stop the federal government from granting Lopez-Reyes lawful permanent resident status in October 2022, during the Biden administration. Less than three years later, he stands charged in a fatal home invasion. The gap between his 2021 arrest and his 2022 green card approval is the kind of timeline that demands an explanation from the agencies that signed off on his status upgrade.
Barias-Florimon entered the United States in 2007 as the child of a lawful permanent resident, Fox News reported. DHS has not publicly detailed whether his immigration record included any prior criminal history before the Milford charges.
The broader question of how DHS handles legal immigrants who commit serious crimes has been a flashpoint in recent months. The agency has faced internal upheaval over enforcement data and personnel, and the Milford case now adds another data point to the debate over whether the system screens green card applicants with sufficient rigor.
Law enforcement secured arrest warrants for both men on July 28. Lopez-Reyes was arrested two days later by U.S. Marshals working alongside Milford Police and New Haven Police. Barias-Florimon proved harder to find.
The U.S. Marshals New York/New Jersey Regional Fugitive Task Force ultimately located and arrested Barias-Florimon in the Bronx on Tuesday, according to a task force announcement. That he had left Connecticut for New York after the attack underscores why federal fugitive resources were necessary to bring him in.
The arrest timeline, nearly two months between the June 3 invasion and the late-July warrants, has not been explained publicly. Whether investigators needed that time to build the case or whether bureaucratic delays slowed the process remains an open question.
The department's public statement left little ambiguity about how it views the legal standing of permanent residents who face serious criminal charges. A DHS spokesperson said Thursday:
"Possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right. Under our nation's laws, our government has the authority to revoke a green card if our laws are broken and abused."
That language signals a posture that treats lawful immigration status as conditional, revocable when the holder is charged with violent crime. The specific federal statute DHS is invoking has not been identified in public statements so far. But the principle is plain enough: legal entry does not confer immunity from consequences.
The administration's willingness to pursue green card revocation fits a pattern of aggressive immigration enforcement that has included direct presidential intervention on ICE operations and sustained pressure on DHS leadership to prioritize public safety over procedural caution.
Fredrick Werner was 69 years old. He lived in a beach house in Milford, a coastal town in southern Connecticut. On June 3, two men allegedly broke into that home and opened fire. Werner died of multiple gunshot wounds. His wife survived a bullet to the head and was hospitalized.
No motive for the attack has been disclosed. The invasion is described as "targeted" in a photo caption but offers no elaboration on what that means or what evidence supports it. Whether the suspects knew Werner, had prior contact with the household, or chose the home at random has not been addressed publicly.
Werner's wife remains in recovery. Her name has not been released. The human cost of the case, a retired-age man killed in his own home, his wife left with a catastrophic injury, is the kind of detail that tends to get lost in policy debates over immigration enforcement. It shouldn't.
Cases like this one have fueled ongoing debates in Congress and within the administration about the adequacy of immigration screening. Recent Supreme Court rulings upholding the termination of Temporary Protected Status have reinforced the executive branch's authority to act on immigration matters, and DHS's move to revoke green cards in this case extends that logic to lawful permanent residents.
The single most damaging fact in this case for defenders of the current immigration vetting process is the date on Lopez-Reyes's green card: October 2022. He had already been arrested. He had already been charged with criminal obstruction of breathing, a violent-contact offense, even if the conviction was ultimately reduced to disorderly conduct. And the federal government still approved him for permanent residency.
That decision was made during the Biden administration. Whether the adjudicating officer had access to the 2021 arrest record, whether the disorderly conduct conviction was flagged during the review, and whether existing policy at the time required denial under those circumstances, none of these questions have been answered. They should be.
The administration's broader push to tighten DHS operations has included internal pressure to install leadership more aligned with enforcement priorities. The Milford case illustrates why that pressure exists. A man with a criminal record was granted permanent status, and less than three years later, a 69-year-old homeowner was dead.
Neither suspect's specific criminal charges in the Milford case have been detailed beyond the home invasion and shooting. Neither has entered a public plea, based on available reporting. The legal process is still early. But DHS is not waiting for a verdict to act on the immigration side.
A green card is supposed to mean something. When the government hands one to a man with a violent arrest on his record and he is later charged with murder, the system did not work, and the people who approved that card owe the public an accounting.
