Accounts vary on some final moments before Aaron McInnis was shot, but Arvoni Hayes admitted criminal responsibility for his death.
PORTLAND, Ore. — Public accounts do not describe every second before Aaron McInnis was fatally shot in exactly the same way, but the criminal case ultimately established its central fact without a jury trial: Arvoni Alexander Hayes admitted guilt to first-degree manslaughter in McInnis’ death.
Hayes, 25, was sentenced Sept. 11 to 18 years in prison after pleading guilty to manslaughter and unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm. He will also serve three years of post-prison supervision, according to the Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office. The plea resolved a prosecution that began with a second-degree murder indictment and means the final judgment is based on the offenses Hayes admitted rather than on the more serious charge prosecutors originally filed.
The distinction is especially important because some public descriptions of the July 14, 2024, confrontation differ around its final moments. The district attorney’s sentencing account says McInnis ran after a vehicle as it sped away and that Hayes got out at a nearby intersection and opened fire. Reporting based on court documents describes additional exchanges around the vehicle and presents McInnis’ movement immediately before the gunfire somewhat differently. Because the case ended through a plea, no jury was required to decide which description most accurately reconstructed every second.
The accounts are more consistent about how McInnis became involved. Prosecutors said the 30-year-old had been dropping off a friend near Normandale Park in Northeast Portland when another man approached him. That man had heard a woman crying inside a nearby car and asked McInnis for help checking on her. McInnis agreed. There is no indication in the public materials reviewed for the case that McInnis had an existing relationship or dispute with Hayes before walking toward the vehicle.
Hayes was inside the car with the woman, whom prosecutors identified as his girlfriend. According to the district attorney, Hayes stepped out naked and eventually agreed to leave her alone. He slowly began dressing before suddenly getting back into the car and telling the woman to drive away. McInnis ran after the vehicle, prosecutors said. Hayes then got out at a nearby intersection and fired, striking McInnis three times. McInnis was taken to Oregon Health and Science University, where he died.
Law&Crime, citing witnesses and court documents, reported additional details surrounding the confrontation. The report said concern about the woman’s safety had prompted McInnis to approach. It also said Hayes and the woman initially indicated that they were OK. According to the report, the woman later told police that she had feared for her life while she was in the vehicle, though the reason was not immediately clear. The same reporting included descriptions of exchanges between Hayes and McInnis that were not set out in the district attorney’s shorter sentencing announcement.
Those differences illustrate the line between a prosecutor’s summary, court filings and facts established by a final conviction. A sentencing release is not necessarily a second-by-second trial record. Defense filings may present events through a different legal perspective. News accounts may combine police allegations, witness statements and court documents. In Hayes’ case, there was ultimately no trial at which jurors heard all of those sources, weighed their credibility and returned findings on the original murder allegation. The guilty plea instead settled a narrower but decisive legal question.
Hayes admitted first-degree manslaughter and unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm. Those convictions establish his criminal responsibility for McInnis’ death and his unlawful firearm conduct. They do not convert every disputed or incompletely reported detail surrounding the confrontation into an established fact. That is why the final case can accurately state that Hayes killed McInnis and was convicted of manslaughter while still noting that some descriptions of the final approach to the vehicle differ across the available public accounts.
The legal process began under different circumstances. After McInnis was shot, Portland police opened a homicide investigation. A Multnomah County grand jury later indicted Hayes on second-degree murder, unlawful use of a weapon and possession of a loaded firearm in a public place. U.S. Marshals arrested him without incident on Sept. 11, 2024. Hayes appeared in court the following day and pleaded not guilty. At that stage, prosecutors stressed that the indictment was an accusation and that Hayes was presumed innocent unless the state proved otherwise.
The eventual plea changed that status. Hayes was no longer merely a defendant facing allegations; he became a convicted offender on the manslaughter and weapon charges to which he pleaded guilty. At the same time, the murder accusation ceased to be the basis for the final disposition. That procedural difference is significant for reporting on the case. Saying Hayes was once charged with second-degree murder is accurate. Saying he was convicted of that offense would not be. His established conviction is first-degree manslaughter.
Deputy District Attorney Eric Palmer used the sentencing to emphasize a fact that is not materially disputed across the accounts: McInnis became involved because of concern for a stranger. Palmer called McInnis “a hero to the very end” and said he did not hesitate to check on another person’s safety. The district attorney’s office also credited Portland homicide investigators and victim advocates for their work during the case. The remarks shifted attention from the procedural differences in the record to the reason McInnis approached the vehicle in the first place.
McInnis’ family had made a similar point long before the case reached sentencing. KPTV reported in 2024 that McInnis was the father of a 10-year-old boy. His father described the family’s shock and spoke about helping support the child after his father’s death. Later material from relatives described McInnis as a son, brother, father and friend who had a reputation for supporting other people. Law&Crime reported that he worked as a sales representative for a local company in the Portland area.
Another unresolved part of the public record concerns the woman whose crying prompted the initial intervention. Prosecutors have not released a complete account explaining her distress before McInnis arrived. Law&Crime reported that she told police she feared for her life, but the publication said it was not immediately clear why. The absence of a trial means there was no extended public examination of her testimony, if any had been anticipated, and no jury finding defining precisely what had happened inside the vehicle before McInnis and the other man approached.
That uncertainty should not be filled with assumptions about abuse, motive or the relationship between Hayes and the woman beyond what authorities have released. The verified sequence establishes that concern for her safety brought McInnis to the car and that a confrontation followed. It does not establish every circumstance that caused her to cry. The distinction matters because the most dramatic interpretation of an incomplete fact is not necessarily the most accurate one, particularly when the criminal case was resolved without the evidence being tested in a public trial.
The same caution applies to descriptions of Hayes’ motive when he fired. The guilty plea establishes manslaughter, but the publicly reviewed sentencing statement does not provide a comprehensive judicial finding explaining Hayes’ mental state second by second during the encounter. The original murder indictment represented prosecutors’ earlier charging decision. The manslaughter plea became the final legal resolution. Reporting the progression accurately requires preserving both facts rather than treating the original accusation and final conviction as interchangeable.
What remains beyond dispute is the consequence. McInnis was struck three times and died. Hayes admitted criminal responsibility and received an 18-year prison sentence. He will be subject to three years of post-prison supervision after release. McInnis’ family lost a father and relative whose intervention began with an effort to check whether someone else was safe. Those facts remain the foundation of the case even where public accounts do not perfectly align on the movements surrounding the vehicle before the shots.
With Hayes sentenced, there is no longer an unresolved question about whether he will face trial on the original murder indictment. The case has ended through convictions for first-degree manslaughter and unlawful use of a weapon. Some details of the encounter remain incomplete or described differently in public sources, but the legal outcome is settled: Hayes accepted guilt for McInnis’ death and is serving the 18-year sentence imposed by the court.
Author note: Last updated October 21, 2026.