• Home
  • About The Herald
  • Local Agencies
  • Daily Email Update
  • Legal Notices
  • Classified Ads

Contra Costa Herald

News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California

  • Arts & Entertainment
  • Business
  • Community
  • Crime
  • Dining
  • Education
  • Faith
  • Health
  • News
  • Politics & Elections
  • Real Estate

Serve on the Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury

January 20, 2026 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Investigate the operations of local government officers, departments and agencies

Application deadline: March 13, 2026

By Contra Costa County Grand Jurors Association

The Contra Costa County Superior Court is accepting applications for Civil Grand Jury Service for the Fiscal Year 2026-2027 term.

Contra Costa County’s Grand Jury consists of 19 citizens. A new Grand Jury is impaneled each year. Grand Jurors are officers of the Court, and function as an independent body under the guidance of a Superior Court Judge. Jurors are impaneled in June and are expected to attend a two-week training in June. Each term serves through June of the following calendar year.

Every year, in each of California’s 58 counties, a group of ordinary citizens takes an oath to serve as grand jurors. Its function is to investigate the operations of the various officers, departments and agencies of local government. Each Civil Grand Jury determines which officers, departments and agencies it will investigate during its term of office.

Apart from the investigations mandated by the California Penal Code, each County’s Grand Jury decides what it will investigate. Investigations may be initiated in response to letters from citizens, newspaper articles and personal knowledge.

If you are interested in applying, please complete the application and review the timeline below.

https://contracosta.courts.ca.gov/…/2026-2027-cgj…

https://contracosta.courts.ca.gov/…/6-timeline-2026…

Source: Contra Costa County Superior Court

Application deadline is 5:00 PM on March 13, 2026.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Filed Under: Courts, Government, Legal

Martinez man, former San Quentin guard charged with lewd acts involving children released pending trial

December 12, 2025 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Former San Quentin Prison Correctional Sergeant William Daniel Eberly. Photo: CA Dep’t of Corrections & Rehabilitation

CCDA’s Office “profoundly troubled by the court’s decision”

Family unsure where he’s living after being evicted from trailer on prison grounds in March

“He keeps getting released and it continues to keep going away.” – Family advocate

By Allen D. Payton

As previously reported, 44-year-old Martinez resident, William Daniel Eberly faces multiple felony charges for alleged lewd acts upon children. He was arrested on Oct. 22, 2025, and arraigned, Thursday, Oct. 23, in Martinez on an 11-count complaint that includes forcible lewd acts on a child under 14 and lewd acts on a child aged 14 or 15. Two victims, identified in court documents as Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2, will remain anonymous to protect their privacy.

The alleged offenses occurred between November 1, 2020, and December 12, 2024, in Contra Costa County. Eberly was employed as a correctional sergeant with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at San Quentin prison at the time of his arrest. Eberly pleaded not guilty to all charges at his arraignment.

Released Pending Trial

According to an advocate for Eberly’s family, who spoke on condition of anonymity, following a pre-trial conference in Martinez Superior Court Thursday morning, Dec. 11, 2025, “he was released pending trial.”

“He hasn’t had anything to do with his children for a very long time. He has four sons with another correctional officer,” the advocate shared.

“A memorandum was sent by San Quentin dated March 20, 2025, by the warden to all employees telling them to stop Eberly at the gate, that he’s not allowed to enter institutional property,” she continued. “He’s been on leave from San Quentin since that date.”

Gate Stop Memorandum dated March 20, 2025, sent by San Quentin Rehabilitation Center Warden Chance Andes to prison staff. Source: Family’s advocate who chose to remain anonymous

“He doesn’t live with either of his ex-wives or his current wife,” the advocated stated. “Nobody knows where he lives. He may be homeless. He doesn’t actually have a residence which is shocking. He was living in a trailer on the prison grounds. But he was told to vacate when he was forced to leave the prison.”

“He was recently granted court-ordered supervised visits with his children,” she said. “But I don’t think he’s seen them in over a year.”

“They first arrested him in March, then let him go because they said they didn’t have enough evidence,” the advocate shared. “This has been going on for like four years, he’s been in and out of custody. He keeps getting released and it continues to keep going away.”

She shared concerns about the children wanting to keep their identities private and out of the public eye.

“People were calling the schools where the kids attend probably to see if he was there picking them up,” the advocate said. “They don’t know he’s been arrested or anything. They don’t need to know. They’re all really young.”

She asked the public not to post photos of the children.

“The reports about him online are wrong,” she also shared. “He’s not Latino. He’s white.”

Asked if she knows Eberly, the advocate said, “Yes, I know him. “But I haven’t seen him in over a year when he last saw the kids.”

“He was always a stickler for the rules. So, this is all very shocking,” she added.

Asked if she attended Thursday’s hearing, the advocate responded, “No. They barred all potential witnesses that the prosecution might call.”

Asked what date has been set for the trial she responded, “We do not know yet.”

Eberly was “released without having to post bail. No ankle monitor. No bail. Released on own recognizance,” the advocate repeated.

Contra Costa DA’s Office “Profoundly Troubled by the Court’s Decision”

Asked about Eberly’s release, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office issued the following statement regarding The People v. William Daniel Eberly Court ruling on 12/11/25:

“Following the presentation of evidence at the preliminary hearing, the court held the defendant William Eberly to answer on 11 felony counts of Penal Code section 288(b)(1), forcible lewd acts upon two child victims.

“During the ruling, Eberly’s defense counsel requested that the court release him from custody on his own recognizance, and a visiting judge in Contra Costa County granted that request.

“The District Attorney’s Office is profoundly troubled by the court’s decision to release Eberly from jail custody.

“In addition to the seriousness of the charged offenses and the clear danger the defendant poses to the community, the Deputy District Attorney prosecuting the case cited several additional factors weighing against release, including:

  • Prior arrests in 2013 for inflicting injury on a child, and in 2020 for inflicting injury on a spouse or cohabitant.
  •  The defendant’s abuse of a position of trust to harm two minor victims.

“Despite these objections, the court reasoned that because the defendant had no prior charges formally filed with the court and because he is a veteran, release was appropriate.

“The District Attorney’s Office will continue working diligently to pursue all available legal options to seek justice for the victims, protect the community, and hold the defendant accountable.”

As previously reported, according to localcrimenews.com, Eberly was previously arrested in 2013 by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office for Contempt of Court: Disobeying a Court Order/Process and in 2020 by the Marin County Sheriff’s Office for inflicting corporal injury on a spouse or cohabitant.

Case No. 01-25-03633 | The People of the State of California v. William Daniel Eberly

Filed Under: Central County, Children & Families, Courts, Crime, District Attorney, News

Commissioner Andrew R. Verriere appointed as Superior Court Judge

September 23, 2025 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Photo source: Hartog, Baer & Hand on LinkedIn

By Matt J. Malone, Chief Counsel and PIO, Superior Court of California, Contra Costa County

The Contra Costa Superior Court is pleased to announce that Governor Gavin Newsom has appointed Commissioner Andrew R. Verriere as the Court’s newest judge. He assumed his new role today and will preside in Department 11. His first judicial assignment will be at the George D. Carroll Courthouse in Richmond.

Judge Verriere has served the Court as a Commissioner since May 1, 2023, handling traffic, unlawful detainer, small claims, and domestic violence and civil harassment restraining order matters. While a Commissioner, he worked with the California Judges Association on proposed legislation to amend Penal Code section 1050 in infraction cases, helped establish a guardian ad litem roster for defendants in limited jurisdiction civil cases, and worked with the Traffic Committee to provide improved language access for traffic defendants who communicate primarily in languages other than English.

Prior to serving as Commissioner, Judge Verriere worked as a trial and appellate litigator in civil and probate matters. He was most recently a principal at Hartog, Baer, Zabronsky & Verriere APC, focusing on trust and estate litigation, conservatorship litigation, financial elder abuse, related litigation, and appeals. A highly-regarded speaker and instructor, he has presented to numerous trade organizations on topics of fiduciary duty, financial elder abuse, and discovery dispute resolution. Judge Verriere is a past member of the Board of Directors of the Contra Costa County Bar Association.

Judge Verriere graduated from UC Berkeley School of Law and obtained his B.A. from the University of California, San Diego. He fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Brian F. Haynes.

Filed Under: Courts, News

Pittsburg man sentenced in child sexual abuse material case

May 29, 2025 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Ricardo Garcia Perez sentenced to two years in state prison

By Ted Asregadoo, PIO, Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office

Martinez, CA – A Pittsburg man was sentenced today for aggravated possession of abusive sexual material following his conviction in Contra Costa County Superior Court on April 16th.

The Honorable John Cope sentenced 32-year-old Ricardo Garcia Perez (born 10/15/1992) to two years in state prison. Perez was further ordered to register for life as a sex offender upon his release from state prison. Perez has been in custody since his arrest and will begin to serve his sentence immediately.

In December 2024, the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force (ICAC) launched an investigation after discovering Perez was distributing child sexual abuse material on an internet platform. After obtaining a search warrant and serving it at Perez’s residence in Pittsburg in January 2025, Perez attempted to destroy the digital evidence on an electronic device he possessed when officers entered his house.

The Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office reviewed the evidence ICAC investigators collected and charged him with a four-count felony complaint on January 28th. Two counts were for aggravated possession of child sexual abuse material, and two counts centered on the possession of child sexual abuse material [PC 311.11(c)1 and PC 311.11(a)].

“Protecting our children from online predators requires a united front,” said District Attorney Diana Becton. “Our active role in the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force allows us to tap into a network of specialized training, forensic tools, and collaborative partnerships that are critical to investigating and prosecuting these disturbing crimes.”

The case was prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Sydney Mastey from the Sexual Assault Unit.

The ICAC program is a joint effort spanning eleven counties dedicated to combating the growing threat of technology-facilitated child sexual exploitation and internet crimes against children. Parents are encouraged to discuss online safety with their children, and can visit the website kidsmartz.org, commonsensemedia.org or the Contra Costa District Attorney’s website for further information.

According to the Contra Costa Sheriff’s Office, the five-feet, five-inch tall, 175-pound Garcia Perez is being held in the Martinez Detention Facility..

Case No. 04-25-00382 | The People of the State of California v. Perez, Ricardo Garcia

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Filed Under: Courts, Crime, District Attorney, East County, News

Letters: Attorney says Contra Costa Superior Court filing process too slow

November 20, 2024 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Dear Editor: 

It typically takes over a month for the Contra Costa Superior Court to process filings in limited civil cases. In fact, more like 6 weeks.

This compares badly with other superior courts throughout the state.

In San Diego Superior, for example, I’ve had papers processed within hours. In Marin County Superior Court, I’ve had papers processed within 1 or 2 days.

This is a real problem because justice delayed is justice denied.

This is a ridiculously long time when it only takes a few minutes to do the processing.

Yes, I understand that they have a lot of filings to process…but with a lot of filing don’t they also have a lot of taxpayer funding commensurate with the size of the population of the county?

So why is Contra Costa so much slower than other counties?

Sincerely,

Edward Teyssier, esq.

National City

Filed Under: Courts, Legal, Letters to the Editor, Opinion

CA Controller publishes 2023 payroll data for state government, superior courts, CSU’s

August 7, 2024 By Publisher Leave a Comment

399,000 positions paid almost $29 billion in total wages

Includes Contra Costa Superior Court and Cal State East Bay data

SACRAMENTO — State Controller Malia M. Cohen has published the 2023 self-reported payroll data for state departments, superior courts, and California State Universities (CSU) on the Government Compensation in California website. The data covers more than 399,000 positions and approximately $28.87 billion in total wages for those agencies and institutions.

Users of the site can view compensation levels on maps and search by region, narrow results by name of the entity or by job title, and export raw data or custom reports.

The newly published data were reported by:

  • 24 CSU institutions (116,235 employees),
  • 56 superior courts (20,884 employees), and
  • 157 state departments (262,097 employees).

California law requires cities, counties, and special districts to annually report compensation data to the State Controller. The State Controller also maintains and publishes state and CSU salary data. However, no such statutory requirement exists for the University of California, California community colleges, superior courts, fairs and expositions, First 5 commissions, or K-12 education providers; their reporting is voluntary. Two superior courts either did not file or filed a report that was non-compliant, including those in Alameda County and Tuolumne County.

The site contains pay and benefit information on more than two million government jobs in California, as reported annually by each entity.

Contra Costa County Superior Court

As of Tuesday, Aug. 6, 2024, the information provided for the Contra Costa Superior Court shows 413 employees were paid $35,892,317 in total wages and $13,761,517 in total retirement & health contribution for a total of $49,653,834 in total compensation, or $120,227.20 on average.

In addition, the report shares, “This superior court includes payments toward the unfunded liability of the employer sponsored retirement plan.” For more information visit www.cc-courts.org/general/administration.aspx.

Cal State East Bay

As of Tuesday, Aug. 6, 2024, the information provided for California State University, East Bay shows 3,651 employees were paid a total wages of $132,664,169 and $58,874,273 in total retirement & health contribution, for a total of $191,538,442 in compensation or $52,461.91 on average. That doesn’t take into account the many part-time positions for the two-campus university.

In addition, the report shares, “This California State University includes payments toward the unfunded liability of the employer sponsored retirement plan.” For more information visit www.csueastbay.edu/hr.

The State Controller’s Government Compensation in California website provides information on employee pay and benefits for approximately 2 million positions at more than 5,000 public employers. Public employers annually report employee compensation to the State Controller’s Office. It allows the public to view and search employee job titles, build charts and graphics, and download custom reports and raw data.

About Controller Cohen

As the chief fiscal officer of California, Controller Cohen is responsible for accountability and disbursement of the state’s financial resources. The Controller has independent auditing authority over government agencies that spend state funds. She is a member of numerous financing authorities, and fiscal and financial oversight entities including the Franchise Tax Board. She also serves on the boards for the nation’s two largest public pension funds. Follow the Controller on X at @CAController and on Facebook at California State Controller’s Office.

 

 

 

Filed Under: Courts, East Bay, Education, Finances, Government, News, State of California

Governor Newsom appoints new judge to Contra Costa Superior Court bench

June 22, 2024 By Publisher Leave a Comment

New Contra Costa County Superior Court Judge Michael Nieto. Photo source: Office of the Governor of California

SACRAMENTO – Governor Gavin Newsom announced on Tuesday, June 18, 2024, his appointment of 15 Superior Court Judges, which include one in Contra Costa County; two in Los Angeles County; one in Marin County; one in Napa County; one in Riverside County; one in Sacramento County; three in San Diego County; one in San Francisco County; two in San Joaquin County; one in San Mateo County; and one in Santa Clara County.

Michael Nieto, of Contra Costa County, has been appointed to serve as a Judge in the Contra Costa County Superior Court. Nieto has served as an Assistant District Attorney at the Alameda County District Attorney’s Office since 2022 and has been a Deputy District Attorney there since 1997.

According to his LinkedIn profile, Nieto worked in private practice as an associate attorney for McCutcheon Doyle Brown & Enersen from June 1994 to Dec. 1996 and earned a Bachelors of Arts in Government from Harvard University.

He has served as an Adjunct Professor at the University of California College of the Law (formerly Hastings), San Francisco since 2013. Nieto earned a Juris Doctor degree from the University of California College of the Law, San Francisco. He fills the vacancy created by the retirement of Judge Clare Maier. Nieto is a Democrat.

The annual compensation for each of the judicial positions is $238,479.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

Filed Under: Courts, Legal, News, State of California

Bay Point, Antioch men convicted of drug trafficking

February 19, 2024 By Publisher Leave a Comment

Following wiretap investigation into East Bay drug suppliers and significant seizures of fentanyl, methamphetamine, cocaine and cash

Third man illegal alien from Mexico; among 13 defendants indicted in 2019

Each face maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for every count on which they were convicted

Attempt to use FBI investigation of APD officers as a defense denied

By U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of California

SAN FRANCISCO – A federal jury has convicted three defendants—Luis Torres Garcia, Evan Martinez Diaz of Bay Point, and Timothy Peoples of Antioch—of multiple drug trafficking offenses following an eight-day trial, announced United States Attorney Ismail J. Ramsey and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), San Francisco Field Division, Special Agent in Charge Brian M. Clark. The jury convicted the defendants on all counts, rendering its verdict on February 14, 2024, after deliberating for two hours. The verdict followed a trial before the Hon. Richard Seeborg, Chief U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of California.

The three were among 13 defendants, including seven from Eastern Contra Costa County, indicted in May 2019 “on narcotics trafficking charges, announced United States Attorney David L. Anderson and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Special Agent in Charge Chris D. Nielsen.  The indictment follows the arrest of five of the defendants on April 30, 2019, and the execution of search warrants at thirteen locations, including nine residences in Contra Costa County, Humboldt County, Fairfield, Suisun City and Modesto.” (See related article)

The evidence at trial included calls intercepted between April 2018 and February 2019 as part of a federal wiretap investigation into two drug suppliers in the East Bay. The intercepted calls established, among other things, that both suppliers received drugs from sources in Mexico. At trial, the government also presented evidence of several significant drug seizures including: 8.8 pounds of fentanyl and heroin in May 2018, valued at as much as $1.1 million, according to uncontested evidence at trial; 18 pounds of methamphetamine in August 2018; and 20 pounds of methamphetamine and one kilogram of cocaine in February 2019. The evidence at trial also established that law enforcement seized more than $300,000 in drug-related cash over the course of the investigation.

Martinez Diaz, 31, of Bay Point, California, was charged with three counts—conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B); possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B); and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B). The evidence at trial established, among other things, that on February 9, 2019, Martinez Diaz was transporting about 20 pounds of methamphetamine and one kilogram of cocaine through a residential neighborhood in Antioch, California, when he realized he was being followed by law enforcement—which knew about the drugs through intercepted calls. Martinez Diaz began driving erratically, briefly evading law enforcement and directing a co-conspirator to discard the drugs he was carrying in the bushes on a residential street. A short time later law enforcement located the drugs, which evidence at trial established had street retail values of $177,860 (methamphetamine) and $40,000 (cocaine). After Martinez Diaz was stopped by police and released with a traffic citation, he was intercepted on a call telling his supplier that he had seen law enforcement and discarded the drugs to avoid arrest. (See judge’s opinion)

Peoples, 44, of Antioch, California, was arrested after law enforcement officers found cocaine in his home, and charged with two counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)–(C). Evidence presented at trial showed that Peoples was a regular customer of an Antioch-based cocaine wholesaler from whom he bought some 10.5 pounds of cocaine for more than $120,000 in a 90-day period. Peoples used the codeword “babies” to refer to ounce quantities of cocaine. The evidence at trial established that Peoples then sold cocaine to his own customers in smaller quantities and used his proceeds to buy expensive cars.

Attempt to Use FBI Investigation of Antioch Police Officers to Defend Himself Denied

According to the judge’s opinion, “In the course of the federal law enforcement investigation in this case, the Drug Enforcement Agency (“DEA”) and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (“ATF”) were assisted by officers from the Antioch Police Department in executing search warrants and evidence collection, the bulk of which occurred in 2018 and 2019. Since then, several Antioch police officers have been accused of, and indicted for various crimes, including civil rights violations and wire fraud.” (See related articles here and here)

During the court case, “Peoples insisted that the federal case against the Antioch officers was relevant because two members of the Antioch Police Department accused of misconduct were present at the search of Peoples’ home on April 30, 2019.”

The opinion continued, “The defendants previously filed a discovery motion to compel production of impeachment material related to Antioch police officers who assisted with the DEA and ATF investigation of the defendants in the instant case. That motion was denied.”

“An evidentiary hearing was set to determine threshold matters in relation to the motion. Having  considered the parties’ briefs, witness testimony, and admitted exhibits from the hearing, the government’s motion is granted, and the defendants are prohibited from referencing the federal investigation of any Antioch police officers.”

The opinion provided background to Peoples’ claim and the judge’s denial.

“Anticipating the issue would reappear at trial, the government filed MIL No. 12 to prevent the defendants from referencing Antioch police misconduct in the presence of the jury without first establishing relevance for fear that this would result in undue prejudice to the government. Dkt. (Docket) 489. In response, Peoples suggested that witnesses and the DEA-6 report regarding the search of Peoples’ home, authored by DEA Agent Mikhail Job, identified Antioch officers accused of misconduct as having participated in the April 30, 2019, search of Peoples’ residence.

Shortly before the pretrial conference, Peoples submitted a supplemental opposition to MIL No. 12 with information he and the government had just learned. Dkt. 521. In that supplemental opposition, Peoples contended that Agent Job had identified Antioch Officer Morteza Amiri, who has since been indicted on wire fraud charges and civil rights violations, as having entered Peoples’ residence alone for five to ten minutes along with his police dog after the occupants had been cleared out and before the official search began. Peoples also suggested that Antioch Officer Kyle Smith, who allegedly exchanged racist texts with other Antioch officers, joined the search of Peoples’ home. The government filed a supplemental response contending that Agent Job received erroneous information from the DEA case agents and had mistakenly named the wrong Antioch officers on his DEA-6 report. Dkt. 528. According to the government, Officers Amiri and Smith were not present at the search of Peoples’ home but were participating in the contemporaneous search of Defendant Lorenzo Lee’s residence. At the pretrial conference, the threshold question of whether Amiri was present at the search of Peoples’ home remained unresolved. The only potential relevance of the Antioch officers’ misconduct turned on whether  Amiri and/or Smith were present at Peoples’ residence such that Peoples could infer the police planted evidence.”

Furthermore, “Peoples failed to establish that a jury could reasonably find that Amiri was present at Peoples residence on April 30, 2019 by a preponderance of evidence. At the evidentiary hearing, both sides admitted several witnesses and exhibits, and the government’s evidence was considerably more persuasive. The government’s witnesses included several law enforcement agents who corroborated their version of the events on the day in question. The testimony of two Antioch officers, Kevin Tjahjadi and Brayton Milner, who participated in the search of Peoples’ residence, was particularly persuasive. Both stated unequivocally that neither Amiri nor Smith joined in that search. The Antioch Police Department CAD reports regarding the search of Peoples’ residence further supported this version of events, identifying only Tjahjadi and Milner as the participating officers.”

Torres Garcia, 38, an illegal alien from Mexico, residing in Rio Dell, California, was charged with conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). The evidence at trial showed that Torres Garcia was a Humboldt County drug trafficker, who used the nickname “Guero.” Torres Garcia received methamphetamine shipments on credit from a Fairfield, California-based drug supplier. On August 8, 2018, the Fairfield supplier attempted to send about 18 pounds of methamphetamine—valued at $158,000—to Torres Garcia in Humboldt County. DEA agents and the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office intercepted the drug courier and seized the drugs during a vehicle stop on Highway 101 near Healdsburg, California. In February 2019, the DEA tracked Torres Garcia to a meeting in Windsor, California, where Torres Garcia delivered about $13,800 in cash to a courier for his drug supplier. Although he was present throughout the trial and listened to closing arguments, Torres Garcia absconded before the jury handed down its verdict; he is now a fugitive. (See judge’s opinion)

According to the judge’s opinion, “Luis Garcia-Torres, defendant, an alien who had previously been deported or removed from the United States  to Mexico on or about May 19, 2016, was found in the Eastern District of Texas, said defendant not having received the express consent of the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, the successor, pursuant to United States Code, Title 6, for re-application for admission to the United States, all in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).”

Sentencing Hearing June 11, 2024

Judge Seeborg scheduled a sentencing hearing for June 11, 2024. Torres Garcia faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment and a minimum sentence of 10 years in prison. Martinez Diaz and Peoples each face a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison for every count on which they were convicted. However, the defendants’ sentences will be imposed only after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

This prosecution is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Daniel Pastor and Joseph Tartakovsky prosecuted the case with the assistance of Erick Machado. This prosecution is the result of an investigation led by the DEA Oakland Resident Office, with assistance from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; Homeland Security Investigations; U.S. Customs and Border Protection; U.S. Postal Inspection Service; the police departments in Fairfield, Antioch, Concord, and Oakland; the Sonoma County Sheriff’s Office; and the California Highway Patrol.

Allen D. Payton contributed to this report.

 

Filed Under: Courts, DOJ, East County, News, Police, U S Attorney

Federal court upholds Glazer’s Truth in Lending law

December 11, 2023 By Publisher 3 Comments

Benefiting 4 million small businesses

SACRAMENTO – A federal district court last week upheld Senator Steve Glazer’s Truth in Lending law in a summary judgment that declined to hear a lawsuit filed by a lender organization that argued the law did not apply to them.

Under legislation that Senator Glazer, D-Contra Costa, authored in 2018 (Senate Bill 1235), California became the first state in the nation to give small business owners the same protections that Truth in Lending laws have given consumer borrowers for more than half a century. The law became permanent this year when Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senator Glazer’s follow-up bill, SB 33.

The lawsuit, brought by online financers called the Small Business Finance Association, sought to invalidate regulations that the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovations (DFPI) adopted to implement Senate Bill 1235, which requires lenders and other finance companies to provide clear and consistent disclosures to small business owners when they offer them financing and when they close a deal.

CORRECTION: The court ruled in favor of the DFPI’s motion for preliminary injunction. The summary judgment (Motion for Summary Judgment) concluded that the disclosures required under the Department’s regulations were lawful under the First Amendment and were not preempted by federal law. 

In his 14-page order, the judge, R. Gary Klausner of the Central District of California, dismissed the plaintiffs’ arguments and praised state regulations implementing the law for protecting small business owners.

“The disclosures will help small businesses understand the cost of SBFs (Subscription Based Financing) and OECs (Original Equipment Costs) and do comparison shopping … Small businesses have asked for standardized disclosures that uncloak the true cost of financing and highlight useful information like “APR (Annual Percentage Rate), repayment amount, frequency of payments and prepayment penalties. The Regulations mandate such disclosures, thereby helping small businesses make informed credit decisions.”

DFPI Commissioner Clothilde Hewlett called Judge Klausner’s decision a “significant victory for small business owners and consumer protection in the State of California. SB 1235, and the accompanying DFPI regulations, ensure that more than four million California small businesses have protections like those enjoyed by consumers under the Truth in Lending Act for more than 50 years.

Hewlett continued: “These regulations empower small businesses to make informed credit decisions and better understand the cost of small business financing products, including merchant cash advances. The DFPI is committed to advancing opportunities for small business owners to achieve the California dream by ensuring a fair financial marketplace.”

The law is aimed at providing small business owners stronger footing in the rapidly evolving small business finance market, where fast-moving online lenders were replacing traditional banks in a largely unregulated world of loans and more innovative financing options.

“The federal district court agreed with the premise of my law, and that is that small businesses should be protected from abuses that were trapping them in a spiral of debt as the online lending industry evolved,” Senator Glazer said. “This law offers a modest measure – disclosure — to help level the playing field for small business owners. It is making California a leader in protecting the interests of small business owners as they seek the capital they need to grow.”

Previously, state and federal Truth in Lending laws applied only to consumer finance. Even the owners of the smallest companies were left to fend for themselves on the theory that they were sophisticated merchants who understood the world of finance. Increasingly, however, that is no longer true. Today’s small business owners are often immigrant entrepreneurs struggling to get their enterprises off the ground with little knowledge of the finance industry. Others are young people or early retirees with no background in finance.

Under the law, the financer must disclose the following at the time they offer financing of less than $500,000 to a business owner:

  • Total amount of financing
  • Total cost of financing
  • Term length
  • Frequency and amount of payments
  • Pre-payment policies
  • Annualized rate

Editor’s Note:  The Herald previously reported in this article based on incorrect information in a press release from Glazer’s office, that Judge Klausner had granted a preliminary injunction against Opportunity Financial LLC (OppFi).  That was in error.  Judge Klausner’s summary judgment order contained no such order and no motion against OppFi was before the court.

 

Filed Under: Courts, Legal, Legislation, News

Richmond, Antioch men convicted of robbery in series of organized SF retail thefts

October 29, 2023 By Publisher Leave a Comment

By San Francisco District Attorney’s Office

On Thursday, Oct. 26, 2023, San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins announced that Sean Raquel Jevonce Simon, Jr. (24) of Richmond, and Delandro Belvine-Brown (22) of Antioch were each sentenced to three years imprisonment after pleading guilty in San Francisco Superior Court to committing robbery in violation of Penal Code Section 211, in relation to a series of retail thefts occurring in San Francisco.

“Retail theft continues to have a major impact on San Francisco’s business community and the city’s economic livelihood. These crimes demand accountability and we need to send the message to others involved in this criminal enterprise that, with the support of our local law enforcement partners, our office will continue to pursue and prosecute those involved,” said District Attorney Brooke Jenkins. “With San Francisco Police Department receiving $15.3 million dollars and our office receiving $2 million from the Organized Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program, law enforcement agencies in San Francisco will continue to identify, investigate, and prosecute all levels of this criminal enterprise.”

In this case, the People alleged that Mr. Belvine-Brown and Mr. Simon were a part of an organized group which committed a series of snatch-and-grab thefts and robberies from Sunglass Hut, LensCrafters, and Veo Optics stores in San Francisco from November 1, 2021, through July 1, 2022. By employing a consistent brazen theft strategy, Mr. Belvine-Brown, Mr. Simon, and others entered the store as a group, rapidly grabbed numerous expensive sunglasses from display shelves, and quickly exited the store and got in an awaiting car. Investigators from SFPD and Brentwood Police Department conducted a joint investigation as there were similar thefts that occurred in Contra Costa County. Investigators from both agencies examined evidence from multiple sources, including store surveillance videos, social media posts, and mobile phone records to identify the Defendants and their criminal activities.

The case against Mr. Belvine-Brown and Mr. Simon was successfully prosecuted by Assistant District Attorney Conrad Del Rosario with support and assistance from District Attorney Inspector Lessa Vivian and Paralegal Chloe Mosqueda. This case was investigated by the San Francisco Police Department’s Burglary Unit and the Brentwood Police Department’s Investigation Division.

“Individuals who openly commit egregious and brazen retail crimes impact not only the store’s viability to stay open for their community, but also have long lasting effects on store employees and customers who are subjected to this blatant disregard for the law,” said Assistant District Attorney del Rosario. “These cases should serve as notice to those would-be thieves that law enforcement will aggressively investigate and prosecute their criminal activity in San Francisco.”

Belvine-Brown and Simon are currently in custody and will be transported to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s custody to begin serving their state prison sentences.

Court Number: Belvine-Brown, 22011459, Simon, 23003591

Filed Under: Bay Area, Courts, Crime, District Attorney, News

  • 1
  • 2
  • Next Page »
Monica's-Riverview-Jan-2026
Liberty-Tax-Jan-Apr-2026
Deer-Valley-Chiro-06-22

Copyright © 2026 · Contra Costa Herald · Site by Clifton Creative Web