COURT ORDER. From San Mateo County Superior Court’s Judge Nicole S. Healy, Department 28 on February 26th, 2025.
Two Excerpts
Page 25. “Finally, even if Measure A passes, it only provides the Board with authority to seek to remove an elected sheriff. Any claim regarding a possible future action by the Board to remove an elected sheriff is not ripe for judicial review.”
Page 26. “San Mateo County is not Sheriff Corpus’s employer. (Essick v. County of Sonoma (2022) 81 Cal.App.5th 941, 951-95 2 [county was not sheriff’s employer, and board of supervisors did not have the authority to hire, fire, or discipline sheriff]; see also Cal. Const., art. V, 13 [“The Attorney General shall have direct supervision over every district attorney and sheriff . . .”].) Notwithstanding that the Board issued a vote of no confidence in the Sheriff (see Ulrich Decl., exh. 4), at present the Board does not have the power to discipline or remove any elected sheriff.
Essick is instructive. In Essick, the Court of Appeal stated that “[i]n commissioning the [investigative report], the Board of Supervisors was fulfilling its ‘statutory duty to supervise the conduct of all county officers.’” (Id., at p. 952 [quoting Dibb, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 1210, citing Gov. Code, § 25303, which created that duty].) Indeed, the appellate court held that the board of supervisors’ written admonishment to the sheriff did not constitute a “reprimand” under POBRA because the board was not the sheriff’s employer. “Reprimands ‘must have employer-driven consequences — affecting promotion, advancement, or pay, and potentially leading to discharge. Written reprimands of peace officers are ‘punitive actions’ only because they “‘may lead to the adverse consequences . . . at some future time’” by the department issuing the reprimand.’” (Ibid., quoting Wences v. City of Los Angeles (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 305, 317 [further citations omitted].)”
Read Judge Cordell’s 400 page independent investigator’s report.
Note 35 pages are missing from the interview of Victor Aenlle.
More on the Sheriff Corpus Lawsuit and the Measure A Election on Coastside Buzz
San Mateo County Supervisors Approve $1.5M for Printing, Mailing and Communications for the March 2025 Special Election to Remove Sheriff Corpus; January 23, 2025
Sheriff Corpus Legal Team Seeks Emergency Relief from “Improperly Calendared” March 2025 Election Rather than a Statewide General Election; January 14, 2025
Statement from the County of San Mateo Regarding Sheriff Corpus’s $10 Million Government Claim & Release of Full Report Transcript which Cost $200k; January 9, 2025
San Mateo County Independent Civilian Advisory Commission on the Sheriff’s Office Holds Special Meeting to Review Judge Cordell’s Report on Sheriff Christina Corpus; November 28, 2024
San Mateo County Supervisors Demand Sheriff’s Immediate Resignation, Terminate Executive Director of Administration Position; November 14, 2024
San Mateo County Supervisors to Consider Seeking Sheriff’s Immediate Resignation over Findings from Independent Investigation; November 13, 2024
San Mateo County Supervisors Approve the First Appointments to Independent Civilian Advisory Commission on the Sheriff’s Office; June 12, 2024
With 250 Unique Sheriff Oversight Models Nationwide, Supervisors Explore Oversight that will Work for San Mateo County; November 2, 2023
More on Sheriff Corpus in Coastside Buzz
Author: mdrag
x
