A federal district court judge on Thursday refused to toss the corruption case against two Contra Costa County developers, who had argued that their alleged bribe of an Antioch city councilmember was merely a campaign contribution protected under the First Amendment.
The ruling by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ended a bid by longtime East Bay homebuilders David Sanson and his son, Trent, to dismiss their federal bribery case on the grounds that their alleged $5,000 payoff — which had been stuffed inside of a blood-orange coffee mug — was no crime at all. The cash aimed to hasten the development of a stalled housing project for David Sanson’s company, DeNova Homes, federal prosecutors claim.
In announcing her decision, Gonzalez Rogers suggested more legal wrangling could lay ahead for the developers’ free speech arguments. But she left little doubt about whether prosecutors erred when they secured their indictments against the Sansons, flatly denying the developers’ bid to toss the case.
“I do agree you have to be careful of First Amendment rights” when it comes to the bribery allegations, Gonzalez Rogers said, adding that “it’s not clear to me” that certain jury instructions typically used in such cases “sufficiently” address that issue.
“But that’s an argument for another day,” the judge said.
The Sansons were indicted in April 2025 on bribery and conspiracy charges, after federal prosecutors say they tried to pay off an Antioch city councilmember and hurry along a planned 533-home subdivision. At the time, David Sanson was CEO emeritus of DeNova Homes, the homebuilding company he helped found, while Trent Sanson formerly worked there as a vice president.
Frustrated at the progress of their Aviano subdivision, the two allegedly offered $10,000 to the councilmember in exchange for placing a key benchmark for the project on a City Council agenda and voting in favor of it, according to the indictment. The agreement allegedly called for $5,000 in cash to the council member and a $5,000 donation to an independent expenditure committee aligned with him.
At the time, Trent Sanson allegedly said the council member was “not going to see anything directly, but Dave will be doing something for you,” the indictment claimed. Later, prosecutors allege, David Sanson met with the councilmember and handed them a DeNova-branded mug filled with $5,000 in cash — all while allegedly telling the councilmember that “Trent told me you needed a little extra shot.”
Unbeknownst to the Sansons, the council member had already contacted the FBI and was recording the meeting. The councilmember has not been named in court documents, though all indications suggest it is former Pittsburg police Lt. Mike Barbanica.
In recent months, the father-son duo claimed they were targeted by an “overzealous” federal investigation that sought to “improperly manufacture” criminal charges, in violation of their First Amendment rights, according to court filings. Their attorneys argued the case should be dismissed, because the indictment “attempts to criminalize conduct fundamental to our American system of representative democracy.”
On Thursday, an attorney for David Sanson reiterated that prosecutors never actually spelled out an explicit quid pro quo in their indictment, prompting debate on the meaning of the Latin term — which typically signals an exchange of favors — as well as the role of campaign contributions and whether prior court precedent demanded the case be tossed.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Green countered that the case was “not a close call,” while stressing that the Sansons’ arguments were off-target.
Gonzalez Rogers agreed — ordering the two men to appear on March 15 for a trial that could last up to three weeks.
If convicted, the two men face up to 10 years in prison on the conspiracy charge and up to five years in prison on the bribery charge.
Jakob Rodgers is a senior breaking news reporter. Call, text or send him an encrypted message via Signal at 510-390-2351, or email him at jrodgers@bayareanewsgroup.com.
#Federal #bribery #case #Contra #Costa #County #homebuilders #proceed #trial