What We Do
We provide the general public with information and educational materials and activities on the California Civil Grand Jury system that will help increase public awareness of the valuable role the civil grand jury plays in our democratic system of government.
We provide comprehensive training on all subjects relative to empaneled civil grand juries available to all 58 counties within California including civil grand jury training as well as specific workshops on key topics relevant to civil grand jury service.
What Are You
Looking For?
Find valuable information on these subjects
Civil Grand Jury Resources
Here you can find sample documents, templates, examples of well-written reports, links to local government resources,
and FAQs.
Our Annual Conference
Every year in the fall, CGJA holds an Annual Conference and Membership Meeting to provide an opportunity for members and civil grand jurors to meet and discuss experiences and hear from speakers and panels on relevant topics of interest.
Chapter Resources
Includes chapter resource documents, suggested activities for chapters, guidance for forming a chapter along with templates.
Get Involved
Join CGJA as an active member, volunteer for CGJA, become a civil grand juror, join a chapter, or support us through a tax deductible donation.
Grand Jurors' Journal
This bimonthly journal is a major source of information about the civil grand jury system and recent updates on CGJA activities of interest to our members.
CGJA and California's Civil Grand Jury System
Learn about CGJA and details about California’s unique system of civil grand juries.
Our Awards
Annual awards recognizing civil grand jury reporting and media coverage along with the Angelo Rolando Service Award.
We can help you become
an effective civil grand juror
CGJA conducts training seminars for civil grand jurors and alternates on their various civil functions. These seminars include twelve full hours of presentations and over 300 pages of training materials. Experienced and highly qualified trainers who have served as civil grand jurors or grand jury legal advisors present these programs locally, throughout the state as “onsite” seminars or via Zoom if Covid-19 restrictions exist.
We also conduct Foreperson and Pro Tem Workshops, Legal Advisors’ Workshops, and Report Writing Workshops.
Stay Updated with Civil Grand Jury News
Follow up to Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report in 2022
"Though Smith never faced criminal charges, the former sheriff retired in late 2022 following a civil grand jury’s finding of guilt against her on six counts of corruption and misconduct. She had served in her role since 1998. "
www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/santa-clara-undersheriff-gun-permit-case-22442521.php
Ex-Santa Clara County undersheriff pleads guilty to bribery in gun permit scandal
San Francisco Chronicle
By Annie Vainshtein Staff Writer
Sep 21, 2026
Former Santa Clara County Undersheriff Rick Sung, left, pleaded guilty Monday to two felony counts of bribery related to a concealed weapons permit scandal. As part of a plea deal, Sung won’t serve jail time but must complete 400 hours of community service and will be on probation for two years.
The former undersheriff of Santa Clara County was convicted Monday of two felony bribery charges, marking an end to an eight-year-long probe into corruption within the sheriff’s office.
In a release, District Attorney Jeff Rosen announced that Rick Sung, who was second in command to former Sheriff Laurie Smith, pleaded guilty on the heels of his retrial. His earlier trial had ended in a hung jury. Sung will not face jail time, but was sentenced to 400 hours of community service and two years’ probation, officials said.
Sung is the latest sheriff’s office employee to face scrutiny for participating in a bribery scheme where the department’s top brass traded the office’s “rarely issued” concealed gun permits in exchange for campaign donations, Apple computers and access to a luxury suite for a Sharks game at San Jose’s SAP Center for Smith and her guests.
Sung will also have to permanently surrender his California peace officer certification. At the same court hearing, officials said a bribery charge against defendant Harpreet Chadha — who held the Sharks luxury suite — was dismissed “in the interest of justice,” officials said in the release.
Prosecutors began investigating the department shortly after the 2018 election, upon receiving a tip that a person had made an “unusually large” campaign donation to an independent expenditure committee supporting the former sheriff’s reelection, officials said.
District attorney’s officials said Sung pushed through gun permits for Apple’s executive security team after the tech company donated 200 iPads to the sheriff’s office. The donation was allegedly withdrawn after the district attorney began looking into the gun permits, some of which were used to protect then-CEO Tim Cook, the Palo Alto Post reported.
Apple Chief Security Officer Thomas Mayer, who allegedly facilitated the trade but argued the iPads were merely a gift, was acquitted in a February 2025 trial that ended in a mistrial for Sung, the outlet reported. Sung was the second member of the department to be indicted for his role in the corruption scheme and was the highest-ranking member of the department ever to be convicted by the Santa Clara County District Attorney’s office of a crime, the Mercury News reported.
A grand jury first indicted former sheriff’s Capt. James Jensen in connection to the plot. Jensen was convicted of felony bribery after prosecutors said he issued gun permits to employees of AS Solution Inc., a security company for executives, after they donated $90,000 to Smith’s reelection campaign.
Several employees of the company were also convicted of bribery. Jensen faced up to four years in county jail but was sentenced to 10 months in jail in 2024.
Though Smith never faced criminal charges, the former sheriff retired in late 2022 following a civil grand jury’s finding of guilt against her on six counts of corruption and misconduct. She had served in her role since 1998.
“My office enforces the law without fear or favor,” Rosen said in a statement. “Law enforcement in Santa Clara County must be equally determined to be incorruptible as it is determined to protect our community.”
Though Smith never faced criminal charges, the former sheriff retired in late 2022 following a civil grand jury’s finding of guilt against her on six counts of corruption and misconduct. She had served in her role since 1998.
Ex-Santa Clara County undersheriff pleads guilty to bribery in gun permit scandal
www.sfchronicle.com
Former Undersheriff Rick Sung won’t serve time in jail but must permanently surrender his law enforcement license and complete 400 hours of community service.2 CommentsComment on Facebook
Grand jury findings draw pushback in proposed Tuolumne County responses
www.uniondemocrat.com/news/article_5cf72bb7-93ca-4cf3-8574-175371dd4299.html
Alex MacLean Aug 28, 2026 Updated Aug 31, 2026
The Tuolumne County Board of Supervisors (from left) Mike Holland, Steve Griefer, Anaiah Kirk, Ryan Campbell and Jaron Brandon take their seats at a public meeting on Jan. 6.
Guy McCarthy / Union Democrat file photo
Tuolumne County supervisors are set to consider proposed responses to recent civil grand jury reports that raised concerns about the county’s handling of conflicts involving District 1 Supervisor Mike Holland and his private development projects, turmoil in the Community Development Department and other issues impacting the public’s trust in county government.
The proposed responses reject many of the findings and recommendations from the jury’s reports released in June, while also repeatedly accusing the citizen-led watchdog group of exceeding its authority.
A staff report written by County Administrator Roger Root that was released publicly Thursday with informational materials for Tuesday’s meeting stated that “County Counsel has worked with staff and the named Board member” to develop the proposed responses.
Holland stated Friday that he did not write the responses, but did not say whether he reviewed, edited or otherwise participated in developing them.
“I did not craft the responses,” Holland stated Friday in an email.
Asked whether he supported the proposed responses and what role he had in developing or reviewing them, Holland said he didn’t feel it would be “appropriate or responsible” to comment before Tuesday’s meeting.
Holland accused the jury of violating California law by investigating private business dealings he had years before holding public office, though he didn’t identify the specific law. He also suggested potential political motivations for him being targeted.
“Maybe your time would be better spent asking why a civil Grand Jury violated penal code and decided to investigate private businesses and matters that were 4 to 5 years before I was even a board member,” he stated. “Was the Grand Jury process used for partisan political reasons and what attorney was advising them to violate the penal code?”
Root and new County Counsel Walter Wall, who began the role on July 1 and nearly a year after former County Counsel Sarah Carrillo resigned after 21 years with the county, did not immediately respond to questions about who drafted the responses, Holland’s role in developing them and whether he’s eligible to participate and vote on them.
The jury’s reports examined turmoil over the past year-plus since the seating of a new county Board of Supervisors that included Holland and District 4 Supervisor Steve Griefer in January 2025, along with broader concerns about ethics, conflicts of interest, transparency and government oversight.
Among the findings of the jury’s report that looked at county governance issues affecting public trust was that Holland participated in a discussion and vote by the board regarding mobile-home park fees at a public meeting on May 6, 2025, despite what the jury determined was a direct personal financial interest due to him being the owner of mobile-home park in the county.
While the proposed response to the finding acknowledges Holland’s participation, it does not concede that he had a disqualifying financial interest, violated state law or harmed public confidence for doing so.
The proposed response argues that determining such a violation goes beyond the jury’s authority and instead should be handled by the state Fair Political Practices Commission or a court.
Another recommendation from the jury was for elected officials to complete additional ethics training within 90 days, though the proposed response rejects the deadline and states that its use of the word “must” shows either a misunderstanding of its role or “weaponization” of the grand jury “for some political purpose.”
Holland was also accused in the jury’s report of holding incompatible offices by simultaneously serving on the Sonora Union High School Board of Trustees, for which he was elected two years prior to successfully running for county supervisor.
The jury recommended that the county counsel ask the California Attorney General’s Office to evaluate whether Holland should be holding both offices, though the county’s proposed response called the jury’s concern speculative and an unnecessary use of county resources.
Colton E. McCurley will soon replace Holland on the Sonora High board after Holland did not seek reelection this year.
Another major disagreement with the jury in the county’s proposed responses was related to Holland’s eight-building storage facility development at 17411 High School Road in Jamestown, which was extensively discussed in the jury’s reports.
The jury recommended that the county hire independent consultants to conduct a comprehensive review of the project’s compliance with building, grading, occupancy, fire-safety and other requirements.
Additionally, the jury recommended against issuing a certificate of occupancy for the project until a qualified employee of the county Community Development Department verified that all county requirements had been met.
The proposed county response would reject both recommendations as “not warranted as framed” because conducting an independent review would be based on an “unsupported premise that the project requires extraordinary re-review.” It also says occupancy would be approved when legally required conditions were verified through “appropriate County procedures.”
Occupancy certificates have since been issued by the county for Holland’s development.
Public records recently requested by The Union Democrat include a letter from Amador County’s chief building official stating that the buildings were fit for occupancy under the California Building Code, provided all other Tuolumne County requirements had been met.
Amador County officials previously told the grand jury that their role was limited to plan review and inspections, while Tuolumne County would be responsible for final approval and issuing occupancy permits.
Root and Wall did not immediately respond before the 1 p.m. Friday deadline to questions sent Thursday evening regarding who approved the occupancy permits and how they determined all of the requirements had been satisfied.
The county proposed responses also conclude by calling on future civil grand juries to "desist from exceeding (their) jurisdiction" and focus on matters the county says is within their legal authority.
Tuesday’s meeting agenda recommends for supervisors to approve the county’s responses, as well as ratify a separate response from Wall.
Wall declared a conflict that he said disqualifies the County Counsel’s Office from advising the 2026-27 grand jury because the office serves as the chief legal advisor to the board and other county departments that may be investigated by the jury.
The meeting begins at 9 a.m. Tuesday in the board’s chambers on the fourth floor of the County Administration Center at 2 S. Green St. in downtown Sonora.
Contact Alex MacLean at amaclean@uniondemocrat.com or (209) 588-4541.
Grand jury findings draw pushback in proposed Tuolumne County responses
www.uniondemocrat.com
Tuolumne County supervisors are set to consider proposed responses to recent civil grand jury reports that raised concerns about the county’s handling of conflicts involving District 1 Supervisor Mi...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
San Joaquin County Grand Jury Report
Stockton City Council to vote on response to findings and recommendations from the SJC Civil Grand Jury
City Council will consider response to grand jury after missing state deadline - Stocktonia News
share.google
The council will meet six days after missing a state-mandated deadline. A proposed response partially agrees with the grand jury findings.0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Ventura County Grand Jury Report Finds Improvements in Ventura County Workers Compensation System but Perceptions-Problems Remain
www.edhat.com
The Ventura County Civil Grand Jury has released an investigative report finding that while the county's handling of workers' compensation claims for deputy sheriffs has significantly improved over th...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Ventura County Grand Jury Report Finds Improvements in Ventura County Workers Compensation System but Perceptions-Problems Remain
www.edhat.com
The Ventura County Civil Grand Jury has released an investigative report finding that while the county's handling of workers' compensation claims for deputy sheriffs has significantly improved over th...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
Santa Barbara County Grand Jury Report-
SB Connects lacks a transparent tracking system
www.newspress.com
The report considers SB Connect to be, in general, needlessly complicated. Highlighted is the 15-step process users must follow to submit a request of any kind— asking for general information like t...0 CommentsComment on Facebook
CGJA Journal
This bimonthly journal is a major source of information about the civil grand jury system and recent updates on CGJA activities of interest to our members.
The Gift of Your Time
is Priceless
CGJA is an all-volunteer membership organization. We succeed mainly because our members volunteer to serve on our committees and/or train civil grand jurors. Serving on committees almost never requires travel as we communicate via email and computer video. Our trainers do travel to venues throughout the state and we reimburse them for lodging, mileage, and a modest per diem for other expenses.
