TESTIMONY CONTINUED Thursday in the hearing of the removal of San Mateo County Sheriff Christina Corpus, with day 4 focusing on the warrantless arrest of a sheriff’s union president who was also an outspoken critic of Corpus.
The hearing is one of the final stages within the county’s lengthy process to oust Corpus, giving her the opportunity to address the allegations against her.
It was spurred by Corpus’ move to appeal the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors’ unanimous decision to oust her in June, an authority the board was granted after voters approved a charter amendment in March’s special election for Measure A.
The measure was the board’s way of removing Corpus, who remained defiant against calls to resign after the release of a scathing, 400-page investigation by retired judge LaDoris Cordell. The investigation alleged that Corpus had an inappropriate relationship with her chief of staff and fostered a culture of intimidation and retaliation in the sheriff’s office.
Retired judge James Emerson was selected by both sides to oversee the hearing.
Thursday’s proceedings centered on the arrest of Carlos Tapia, the president of the San Mateo County Deputy Sheriff’s Association union, or DSA.
On Nov. 12, 2024, Corpus directed the arrest of Tapia on suspicion of timecard fraud, believing that there was probable cause.
“Significant discrepancies became apparent in his reported timecards, especially in his designation of DSA,” read the audit performed by former assistant sheriff Matthew Fox.
District Attorney Stephen Wagstaffe subsequently threw out the charges.
“We have concluded based on the follow-up investigation that no crime was committed by Deputy Carlos Tapia, that the complete investigation showed that there was no basis to believe any violation of law had occurred, and finally that Deputy Tapia should not have been arrested,” Wagstaffe said in a statement following his decision.
Tapia’s arrest sparked allegations of retaliation by Corpus, since Tapia was a leading voice speaking against her and her chief of staff, Victor Aenlle. Two months before Tapia’s arrest, the DSA and another union, the Organization of Sheriff’s Sergeants, passed a vote of no confidence in Aenlle.
Several witnesses involved in the Tapia investigation and arrest testified on Thursday including Fox, Lt. Brandon Hensel, and Payroll Supervisor Van Enriquez. One of the county’s attorneys, Franco Muzzio, led the direct examination of each witness.
Fox briefly worked as acting assistant sheriff under Corpus from September to November 2024 before quitting just a few days after the release of the Cordell report.
He testified on what unfolded before Tapia’s arrest, saying that in mid-October of 2024, Corpus asked Fox to launch an investigation into Tapia’s timecards and attendance.
As the president of the DSA, Tapia can count DSA-related activities as hours worked, known as “release time.”
When filling out his time sheets, Tapia must enter in specific codes that indicate if he was either conducting DSA business, which falls under “release time,” or working regular hours in the transportation bureau where he’s assigned.
Fox said that after reviewing attendance records and timecards of Tapia, he noticed discrepancies in the coding of his release time on his time sheets.
He saw that in the time sheets prior to August 2024, Tapia never included the correct code for DSA release time, an error that could cause the county to be billed instead of the DSA.
“She just wanted to make sure if he was doing DSA time, that he was coding properly and not billing to the county,” Fox said when explaining why Corpus wanted Tapia’s timecards to be evaluated.
Fox testified that Corpus told him that she believed Tapia began using the correct codes in August because around the same time, tensions were brewing between the DSA and Corpus’ executive team following a contentious meeting discussing contract negotiations.
“That was my understanding of the conversation,” Fox said while nervously scratching his head. “That was the reason why he started coding correctly, because of the opposition.”
Wagstaffe’s investigation chalked up the coding mistakes to technical and human error.
“There were clerical errors in the manner in which work hours were coded but nothing showing criminal intent or criminal conduct,” Wagstaffe said in a statement. “Additionally, there was no monetary loss to the Sheriff’s Office by the miscoding. Therefore, we deem this matter closed.”
Corpus then decided to arrest Tapia without a warrant. She asked Fox to notify the district attorney’s office of the arrest beforehand, according to Fox’s testimony.
Fox said he met with Shin-Mee Chang, the chief deputy district attorney. He said that during their conversation, Chang was uneasy about the arrest.
“She said, ‘If you have probable cause to arrest him, you can arrest him. I’m not going to tell you that you cannot arrest him,’” Fox said on the stand while raising his voice.
“That’s what I told you,” Fox said while looking in the direction of Corpus who was sitting with her attorneys.
Corpus’ attorney Thomas Mazzucco interjected, saying to Emerson that Fox needed to control his emotions.
With the clock approaching 5 p.m., Muzzio suggested that it would be a good time to conclude testimony for the day.
Fox then hurriedly exited the courthouse. He is expected to resume his testimony Friday morning.
Outlining grounds for removal
The county is trying to prove that Tapia did not misrepresent the hours he worked in his timecards to demonstrate that Corpus’ order to investigate Tapia and subsequently arrest him is grounds for Corpus’ removal.
With the passage of Measure A, the board can remove the sheriff for “cause,” which includes violating any law related to the performance of the sheriff’s duties, flagrant or repeated neglect of duty, misappropriation of public funds or property, willful falsification of official statements or documents, or obstruction of a lawful investigation into the sheriff or the Sheriff’s Office, according to Section 412.5 of the county charter.
The county’s attorneys believe that Corpus’ ordering for the investigation and arrest of Tapia involved a conflict of interest due to Tapia’s public criticism of Corpus, thus violating laws related to the performance of her duties.
These violations include “flagrantly neglecting her duties and obstructing an investigation into herself and the Sheriff’s Office,” according to the law firm the county has hired. At the time of the arrest, Tapia had been interviewed in Cordell’s investigation of Corpus.
The county’s attorneys also argue that Corpus violated the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office standard policy, which states that in-house investigations on potential criminal activity must be referred to the District Attorney’s Office.
“This policy is important to prevent the Sheriff from unilaterally conducting and acting on allegations of serious misconduct where conflict of interest are present, such as the investigation of a union leader by the Sheriff,” according to an independent report the county’s attorneys released in May.
Once the hearing concludes, Emerson will have up to 45 days to submit his written opinion to the board of supervisors, which must contain a recommendation on whether there are grounds for Corpus’ removal.