BY EMILY MIBACH
Daily Post Managing Editor
A federal judge yesterday (Aug. 7) questioned an attorney for San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus about his argument that a hearing to remove her on corruption allegations should be stopped before it begins.
Wilson Leung, a lawyer for Corpus, argued in front of U.S. District Court Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco that her constitutional rights as an elected official are being damaged by the removal process, causing her “irreparable harm.”
Leung’s goal during yesterday’s half-hour hearing was to get the Measure A hearings put off, or canceled altogether, something Corpus’ legal team has tried before local judges in San Mateo County to no luck. The hearings are scheduled to start Aug. 18.
San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Nicole Healy previously ruled that the hearings ought to play out before any decision is made on their legality.
Chhabria asked Leung what the point was in interfering with local government proceedings. He said that it’s possible that after Corpus is removed, she could be reinstated.
“Before the end of the year … I could order the county to give her back pay, and maybe even damages for reputational harm,” Chhabria said. “I’m not saying you have much of a chance prevailing in those proceedings. The opportunity would be available to you to convince me that such a remedy is required.”
Corpus is being removed under the authority of Measure A, an amendment to the San Mateo County Charter that was approved by voters in March by an 84% to 16% ratio. Measure A gives the Board of Supervisors authority to remove the sheriff for cause. The Measure A processs has begun with the Board of Supervisors voting to terminate Corpus. She is now appealing that decision and her appeals hearing is set to begin Aug. 18.
Leung, Corpus’ lawyer, reiterated his legal team’s argument that Supervisors Noelia Corzo and Ray Mueller should not vote in the removal proceedings because they have said Corpus should resign. However, they did so as representatives of the five-member Board of Supervisors.
The county’s attorney, Franco Muzzio, argued that the upcoming hearing on Aug. 18 will give Corpus the opportunity to testify and clear her name.
Why not a recall?
Chhabria asked Muzzio why the county went with Measure A and did not go the recall route to remove Corpus.
Muzzio said he didn’t know because he had not spoken to any of the supervisors.
A recall effort had been started by former Caltrain/SamTrans chief Jim Hartnett and former state Sen. Jerry Hill, but was put on pause to let the Measure A process play out.
Chhabria said he would issue a ruling “shortly.”
As some spectators indicated long ago, the most expeditious route to removal of elected and appointed officials is through the seldom used and little known, yet long established, §3060 Government Code (GC) procedures. §3060 GC is the law. It has been for quite a long time. It has been used before in application to elected sheriffs, among others.
Another removal option is the Recall process, which like any option has both benefits and drawbacks. Thanks to Measure A, and the voters who supported that Charter Amendment, San Mateo County benefits from a third option of the Charter proscribed removal process.
Now we know that the location of the Removal Hearing will be at 500 County Center, Redwood City, and the deadline to complete it is August 31, 2025. Therefore the Removal Hearing is scheduled to begin on or about August 18, 2025. We can expect that to comply with existing privacy laws for whistleblowers and peace officer privacy concerns, some aspects of the hearing could take place in a very limited non-public manner.
Regardless, if seen through to a hearing officer decision without Corpus resigning her position, which is always a possibility, it will be history in the making. Some may think that was Corpus’ self-centered, end-game and plan all along; to be a history maker, not a peace keeper. Perhaps she is more transparent than given credit for in a totally different manner.
While we’re waiting for the Removal Hearing to convene on Monday, August 18th, I’ll call attention to a boatload of sworn testimony — everything heard behind closed doors by the civil grand jury — that is almost certain to be unsealed two days before the 18th — courtesy of a motion in Superior Court Case 25-CIV-04846, People v. Corpus, by DA Wagstaffe.
Looking in the online record, one sees the 13-part grand jury transcript already uploaded, and just waiting to be unsealed at the end of the statutory 10-day waiting period. Tick-tock.
And, don’t forget, this will include Christine Corpus’s first-ever testimony on any of these matters, where she showed up late and was obliged by law to answer questions without the assistance of counsel. It should make interesting weekend reading.
“she showed up late and was obliged by law to answer questions without the assistance of counsel.”
Why was she obliged by law to answer questions without the assistance of counsel? What law?
Woodlandia- Corpus was subpoenaed to testify at the Civil Grand Jury- where she called in sick for a week and almost was held in contempt. When she finally testified she was late. So there is the reference to – respecting laws. The Sheriff is trying to delay testifying at all costs!
Corpus publicly said make the Measure A hearing open to the public. Behind the scenes she has filed federal law suits to stop Measure A. Corpus also has tried to get a court order signed that she herself does not have to testify and tell her story – in the setting that she says she has been waiting for… and the judge denied it.
There are 3 investigations proving an “inappropriate” relationship with Aenlle- yet her attorneys argue that it doesn’t say sexual therefore it’s not the same as inappropriate- either which way call the spade a spade- the relationship is wrong, it is against county policies whether you call it sexual, besties, close friends etc etc.
Slimy attorneys, no respect for defending this piece of garbage sheriff. Resign Corpus, it’s well past time for it.
Woody, grand jury proceedings are secret. They’re held behind closed doors. See Penal Code Section 924.2. The only people allowed inside the hearing room are authorized individuals, such as grand jurors, the prosecutor, the witness, a court reporter. An attorney for a witness isn’t an authorized person. If a witness needs to consult an attorney, they can consult with him during a break.
Woodlandia: As the anonymous commenter said, subpoenaed witnesses’ attorneys may _not_ accompany clients to answer a grand jury’s (really, the DA’s) questions, though they may wait outside in a corridor.
Lawyers sometimes advise clients to exercise the right to consult counsel before answering each grand jury question, e.g., say “I respectfully request permission to leave the room to consult with my lawyer before I answer that question”, each and every time.
Christina Corpus has been notably averse to ever being put under oath, e.g., S.M.C. Detective Carryn Barker’s sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit against the Sheriff’s Office was hastily settled in 2023 just before Corpus would have been forced to testify. Coincidence? Maybe.
Some people have more reason to avoid giving sworn testimony than others, but compelled sworn testimony without a lawyer’s in-person assistance is particularly perilous.
Corpus’ legal team seems almost as delusional and she does. Victor should stop spending his wife’s trust fund on Corpus’ legal team and instead clean up his shanties in Half Moon Bay where the mass shooting occurred. Funny how Dan Noyse never touched that story but then again all this is all funny business.
Is the moral to this story that an elected official or elected Sheriff should never be held accountable for any wrongdoing? That the Sheriff should only be removed via recall or civil grand jury hearings? That the 90,000 voters of San Mateo County do not have a voice to grant the Board of Supervisors authority to remove a Sheriff for cause.
Here we are, a year into this mess, the Sheriff will lie, sue, fight, battle everyone and go out kicking and screaming like an irresponsible child. Otherwise, a mentally stable person would have said all of the money in the world and Presidential lawyers will not deem a Sheriff above the law.
Christina shouldn’t give up. She should file another lawsuit and get another judge. There’s probably 109 judges in that building. I’m sure she can find one who will agree with her.
Corpus and her posse of clown attorneys are making a mockery of the justice system. Court/Judge shopping is so morally corrupt it is ridiculous! She thinks she can thumb her nose and do anything she wants. This idiot so called “sheriff” is in for a rude wake up!!! She is going to pay dearly for her abject corruption, color of authority crimes she has committed, retaliation against good decent employees and violation of nepotism policy. There are going to be very credible witnesses who will testify against her. There will be damning evidence showing just what a liar she is. Resign now Crapus. Everyone…and I mean EVERYONE has had it with you!!!
Come on folks. A defensive attorney’s game plan is to present his argument. If he/she gets shut down. Form another argument in front of another (state) judge. Again, if he/she gets shut down, kick it up a notch, go federal, and develop another argument. How many bites out of the apple will Christina be allowed?
Wonder what resort Victor and Corpus are passing the Grey Poupon at this weekend.
What about the many many people that have suffered the wrath of Corpus? Does a sheriff supersede all people and they do kot matter?
There are many people who have had their civil rights violated and many county policies ignored. Noone should allow those wronged to be ignored and the Sheriff to get away with corruption. Shame on her attorneys for continuing to allow this to go on and not recommend her to step down. This is a waste of taxpayer money and 100% attorney breed because they’re getting paid by the county with every appeal and continuance an additional lawsuit it’s frivolous and reckless and unacceptable
The prosecution and defense are both being paid by the County Tax Payers. This is crazy. I hope this is not the case, but it appears that Corpus has a blank County check for her attorney fees. The attorney she just added to her team can’t be cheap.
Lawyers say the wackiest things, and judges are former lawyer who sometimes agree.
Remembee the #ResignTomPerez campaign? Hopefully this new attorney will also teach his new client #ResignChristinaCorpus – after the 8 attorneys for Corpus unnecessarily milk the county funds dor their fees to delay, deter and extend the inevitable. Remember Corpus is the perpetrator not the victim.
Maybe one of the defendants should go to court since their attorney has never talked to them. Could mean the difference of the Sheriff winning a ruling or the Sheriff being held accountable for her violations.
Painting Corpus to be a victim of the county has to stop. She has hired an executive team that continues to do nothing except terrorize people they don’t like. It’s like working in a foreign 3rd world country where the Sheriff team doesn’t follow any rules , don’t understand civil rights violations ie PERP , don’t respect the unions, don’t follow county policies etc.
What kind of civil rights violation would the Sheriff defend herself from? The San Mateo County voters want their Sheriff department back and she would lose a recall by a landslide. She is making this about her extending pay in office and she is not working for the voters. The voters want to see a resignation from her. How despicable, negligent and selfish.
Read the California laws and how they apply in a Charter County and then go pound salt. The real violation here is the defense as if the Sheriff follows voting rules of a general county vs a charter county vs a city. This is San Mateo County not Los Angeles, not San Francisco, not Washington DC. The San Mateo county voters approved Measure A . Stop this nonsense. Fire this crazy, disrespectful lady already. The voters didn’t specify process to remove a sheriff snd the argument is disingenuous. If Corpus was fired June 6 without a skelly type hearing, without an appeal process and now she claims she wants to tell her story snd be transparent? She asked to be removed from testifying the next day, she wants to be removed from having to be there, she wants to and watch other people testify. This case is about Corpus’ violations.
The board of supes will have to decide who replaces Corpus and I’ll bet the horse-trading is going on behind the scenes, even though it would violate the Brown Act. It’s known that Jackie Speier favors Susan Manheimer, the former San Mateo police chief. Manheimer’s supporters are planting stories in the media to try and repair her reputation. But we shouldn’t forget that she was the chief who hired convicted serial rapist Noah Winchester. And it was her detectives who botched the prosecution of the murderer of East Palo Alto anti-drug crusader David Lewis. The suspect walked into the police station and confessed. But officers didn’t read him his Miranda rights, so the confession didn’t count. There’s no way she should become county sheriff. If the supervisors appoint her, they’re just backing the kind of corruption they’re trying to eliminate by firing Corpus.
Your points are very valid, and there are likely more points aligned with the position that you have articulated. Realistically, Corpus has largely poisoned the pool of potent candidates for appointment, based on her absurd conspiracy theories. Appointing any of those Corpus has mentioned, with great intention, would only serve to arguably support her fabricated conspiracy theories. All of them, from the unfounded corruption assertions concerning her predecessor to the “godfather” theories propagated by Aenlle about Mr. Callagy. Yet if the Board follows the well documented trend for a couple decades now in public records about their discussions on sheriffs vacancies, as well as a past Grand Jury recommendations, the Board should more than likely call for a special election to fulfill the remaining term.
That special election will generally be within the statutory time constraints of the County Charter, which is something like between 102-131 days from the removal, or resignation, of the incumbent. It also appears extremely unlikely that Corpus’ current Undersheriff and Assistant Sheriff would remain to assume the duties of the sheriff. The role of sheriff will remain vacant until the special election. More than likely is that the Board, or Mr. Callagy, will appoint an Undersheriff to fulfill the sheriff’s duties until the newly elected sheriff takes office. That Undersheriff will likely agree not to run in the special election.
Concerning Corpus, I personally find it possible, but highly unlikely, that she will actually sit through two full weeks of listening to witnesses testifying truthfully against her in the public removal proceedings. Especially since that public testimony will be fuel for the multitude of punitive lawsuits already filed against her, as well as those not yet filed against her. Qualified immunity will not protect her from her malicious behaviors committed under color of authority. I would think the odds favor her resignation either immediately before testimony begins, or at the point of a judgement being returned by the hearing officer, prior to the Board acting on the hearing decision. I could absolutely be very incorrect in this or any other thought that I have shared.
I like Manheimer- but she retired years ago. She’s filled in a couple of departments in Oakland and San Bruno… how old she now? Would she be involved or just sit in her office being late everywhere?
It’s a wild card bringing in someone who hasn’t worked with the people. Morale is at an all time low. Last thing the Sheriff office needs is something that retired. Last thing the sheriff office needs is her two faced San Mateo chief that replaced her. Not sure why the journal wrote those articles.
Bring back Monaghan and Hsiung- they are respected and trusted amd motivated to fix things. Right the wronged first.
Trying to stop public testimony- why be transparent ? Just pretending to want to tell the public her story.
Keep filing frivolous lawsuits and now has 8-10 attorneys all getting paid by the county.
Will use delay tactics to stall any hearing from happening. Is demanding HR records which is illegal- but who cares a sheriff has no rules.
Not showing up daily and actually working but getting a full salary, benefits.
Actually, the world we live in protects elected officials at nauseam and prevents any discipline and consequences even though there have been employment labor law violations confirmed by PERP, county leaders asking the sheriff to step down, unions filing claims of employees being presented to unfair labor practices, arresting employees. Firing employees, a ballot measure with 90,000 people asking the sheriff to step down etc next time the County attorney is asked why Measure A and not a recall or civil grand jury- have a better answer than I have never talked to the board of supervisors. GET some knowledge on what and who you are protecting please. The judge need s to hear the history of this to understand better the issues that lead ul to measure A – when the judge asked know your stuff.
Protect our county- the lawyers and heavy hitters need to step up.
We need laws in place to ensure a corrupt sheriff never gets to drag out a firing again, wasting millions on legal fees to get fired anyways years later vs immediately.