BREAKING: An El Paso jury has recommended the death penalty for Facundo Chavez.

EL PASO, Texas (KTSM) – The sentencing hearing for Facundo Chavez is in jeopardy as Judge Diane Navarrete is considering a mistrial.

This came after the prosecution played body cam video from the night Chavez shot and killed Deputy Peter Herrera, prompting the victim’s family to walk out of the courtroom in an emotional display.

Chavez was convicted of capital murder on Aug. 3. The jury has been hearing testimony in the sentencing phase since Friday.

Here is a recap of the day:

The jury first heard testimony from Chavez’s sister who corroborated Chavez’s previous testimony that he was sexually assaulted by a family member at a young age. She also testified that the same family member attempted to assault her at the age of 9.

She continued with her testimony, describing the close relationship she once had with Chavez up until his relationship with Arlene Pina, who was his girlfriend at the time of Herrera’s murder. Pina took a plea last year and was sentenced to 15 years in prison for manslaughter for her role in Herrera’s murder.

She then explained that she found out about her brother killing Herrera on the news and had to inform her mother. She said she lost her job with the school district she was employed with because of her brother’s legal troubles.

Towards the end of her testimony she finished with a statement that said quote:

“I’ve never tried to justify what he did but at the end of the day he is still my little brother.”

Afterwards both the state and the defense rested their case and began with their closing statements.

Attorney William Dixon instructed the jury to understand the severity of the crime and that Chavez is a violent human being.

He said to the jury, “No doubt he is a danger and will continue to be a danger if given life without parole.”

Dixon continued by saying that Chavez does not actually feel remorse for his actions and that he has continuously lied to the jury.

Defense attorney Louis Lopez then began his statements telling the jury that the state has continuously misled them. He attempted to explain to the jury that this shooting was not random.

Lopez brought up Chavez’s former girlfriend, Arlene Pina, and her connection to that night. He again told the jury that they do not need to believe it was Pina who instructed Chavez to shoot Herrera, but instead to believe that Chavez believed her.

Lopez continued and said that there are no records of Chavez being violent during his time at the El Paso County Detention Facility and has faced no disciplinary actions.

The prosecution continued with their closing statement after Lopez was finished.

Rick Locke for the state began his statement by playing the dash cam footage from the night Chavez shot deputy Herrera. In the video you can clearly see Chavez shooting Herrera until the deputy is forced out of sight of the camera. Locke then turned to the jury and said, “Do you see a continuing threat? Probably.”

Locke told the jury that Chavez actually has done nothing to prove that he has changed or that he is remorseful for his actions. He then reminded the jury that Arlene Pina is not on trial, that it is Facundo Chavez who is the one on trial.

Locke then concluded with the body cam footage from the responding officer from that same night. In the video you can see the severity of Herrera’s injuries and you can clearly hear Herrera say to the officer, “I don’t want to die.”

Herrera’s family, including his mother and widow, began to cry in the courtroom. They soon decided to leave, causing a disturbance. That caused Judge Diane Navarrete to demand the video be stopped.

She reprimanded the prosecution for playing the video in their presence and expressed her disappointment in the District Attorney’s Office.

However, Locke informed the judge that they did tell Herrera’s family that the video would be played.

Nevertheless, Lopez requested a mistrial for the defense due to the fact that the jury saw the emotional state of the family.

Judge Navarrete said she would take their request under advisement but the jury has begun deliberation.

If Navarrete declares a mistrial it would not affect the guilty verdict. It would mean that sentencing would have to restart with a new jury which could take months before it is returned to the courtroom.