Opening arguments in the misdemeanor trial of San Bernardino City Council member Treasure Ortiz centered Monday on a single, pivotal question: did those she recorded consent to the conversations or did Ortiz unlawfully eavesdrop in violation of Penal Code Section 632?
Prosecution, defense present starkly different legal views
San Bernardino County Deputy District Attorney Carlo DiCesare told jurors that Ortiz secretly recorded conversations with San Bernardino Police Chief Darren Goodman and with Jose Loera, president of the San Bernardino Police Officers Association and a police sergeant. DiCesare said prosecutors will prove consent was not explicitly given and therefore the recordings breached California’s two‑party consent statute.
The defense framed the matter differently, arguing that state law does not require a verbal, explicit statement of consent in the circumstances at issue. That contrast — between the requirement of verbal consent and a broader understanding of implied consent — will be central as the jury considers whether Ortiz violated Penal Code Section 632, which makes it unlawful for a person who, "without consent, intentionally uses an electronic amplifying or recording device to eavesdrop upon or record a confidential communication."
"The case will turn on whether consent was given and whether the conversations were confidential," the prosecutor told the jury during opening statements.
Key facts presented to jurors
DiCesare outlined specific facts during the morning session. The charges stem in part from a meeting on Aug. 15, 2024, at DJ Coffee Shop, 265 E. 40th St. in San Bernardino, where prosecutors say Ortiz met with Loera for one hour and 19 minutes. Prosecutors allege she also recorded conversations with Chief Goodman about searches of a law enforcement database for information about Ortiz — information Ortiz has said was sought to discredit her campaign for City Council.
Ortiz pleaded not guilty in February to the two misdemeanor eavesdropping counts. On Monday, San Bernardino Police Chief Darren Goodman was called to the witness stand.
- Defendant: Treasure Ortiz, San Bernardino City Council member
- Charges: Two misdemeanor counts of eavesdropping under Penal Code Section 632
- Key prosecution witness called: San Bernardino Police Chief Darren Goodman
| Alleged incidents | Date / Place |
|---|---|
| Meeting with Jose Loera (police sergeant and POA president) | Aug. 15, 2024 — DJ Coffee Shop, 265 E. 40th St. |
| Conversations about database searches involving Ortiz | Noted in prosecution opening statements |
Implications for local government and police relations
The case carries implications beyond the courtroom. It involves an elected City Council member, the police chief and the police officers association, and prosecutors said the recordings related to internal inquiries about searches of a law enforcement database. Ortiz contends those searches were intended to discredit her ahead of her council campaign, a claim the prosecution disputes as it seeks to show the recordings were made without consent.
How jurors interpret the exchanges — whether they were confidential and whether consent was given — will determine whether Ortiz is convicted of misdemeanor eavesdropping. A conviction could affect public confidence in local officials and influence conversations about transparency, privacy and conduct by elected leaders in San Bernardino.
The trial is being heard at the San Bernardino Justice Center. Proceedings will continue as witnesses are called and evidence is presented to the jury.
As the case unfolds, residents can expect more testimony about the nature of the recorded conversations and the legal standards governing consent under California law.
