{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreigmwlzybeyq24n46qzwjtn4fk4sykmlqh6syvjizplemrtysrdf2i",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:brbfxknpinpcv53otqnq7pxe/app.bsky.feed.post/3mhnpdkzmz2j2"
  },
  "coverImage": {
    "$type": "blob",
    "ref": {
      "$link": "bafkreifegimdctbsr42oldzyapl6pooslfps4gqvugzgbaguwowlruptse"
    },
    "mimeType": "image/jpeg",
    "size": 222590
  },
  "description": "“I’m not saying that anyone is lying, or that there is a series of mistakes. I am saying that we do not know,\" Bianco said. ",
  "path": "/judge-to-supervise-riverside-sheriffs-prop-50-vote-recount/",
  "publishedAt": "2026-03-22T13:59:11.000Z",
  "site": "https://ielaw.news",
  "tags": [
    "Riverside Record first broke the news",
    "were reported by the Riverside Registrar of Voters",
    "reported",
    "here",
    "California Constitution, Article V, Section 13",
    "Government Code Section 12560"
  ],
  "textContent": "A judge ordered the Riverside County Sheriff's Office’s recount of the November election to be placed under the supervision of Riverside Superior Court on March 19.\n\nAt a March 20 press conference, Riverside Sheriff and governor candidate Chad Bianco denied any knowledge of election fraud occurring in the recent election, and said the recount is a fact-finding operation.\n\n\"I’m not saying that anyone is lying, or that there is a series of mistakes. I am saying that we do not know,\" Bianco said.\n\n### An ongoing investigation across 4 years\n\nThe Sheriff’s Office has been investigating Riverside’s elections since 2022, Bianco said. Through the investigation, the office has referred some allegations of election fraud to the District Attorney for prosecution. Bianco did not know how many cases were prosecuted, or whether the prosecutions resulted in convictions. The Riverside District Attorney’s Office is reviewing its records to determine the results of the referrals, and could not provide a report by the end of Friday.\n\nOn Feb. 9, the Sheriff’s Office executed a search warrant and seized the ballots from the Nov. 4, 2025 election, in which California voters approved the partisan gerrymandering of Congressional districts. The Riverside Record first broke the news of the search warrant on Feb. 25.\n\n### The reason for the recount\n\nBianco said his office seized the ballots because of statements from a group of Riverside residents that call themselves the Riverside Election Integrity Team. The group said they conducted an audit of the vote. Under their count, 627,802 ballots had been delivered. Some were rejected, leading to 611,426 cast ballots. They compared that to the final tally, in which 657,322 ballots were reported by the Riverside Registrar of Voters. Their math came to a difference of 45,896.\n\nRiverside County Registrar of Voters Art Tinoco told the Riverside County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 10 that the group relied on unprocessed data and did not count confidential voters, conditional voter registration votes and provisional votes, the Riverside Record reported. The real discrepancy due to error was only 103 votes, Tinoco said.\n\n“If you add those numbers, you’re going to balance exactly like we did,” Tinoco said.\n\nThe Sheriff’s Office’s Media Information Bureau wrote by email that the Sheriff’s recount will include the count from those ballot types.\n\n### The point of the recount\n\nBianco said that the Sheriff’s Office’s recount is the best way to determine the truth.\n\n“Our investigation will determine the validity of that alleged discrepancy, and if found true, we will determine the cause. We will do that by physically counting the ballots,” Bianco said.\n\n“The investigation is going to determine what the discrepancy is. We don’t know what the discrepancy is. Is it human error? Is it machine error? Were the humans right in the number of ballots that came in, and the machines counted differently? It is impossible for us to know unless we do an investigation. The only way we know for sure is if we get a very accurate recount of the number of ballots and then compare that to what the voting machines tallied at the end and reported to the Secretary of State. What we want to see is the exact number. That would be ideal, if the exact ballots are exactly what the machines counted. That is what we would like to see, so we can assure Riverside County voters that their elections are completely secure. To be very honest with you, I don’t want to see a 50,000 difference,” Bianco said.\n\n### County response\n\nThe Registrar of Voters did not comment on Bianco’s comments. Riverside County Executive Officer Jeff Van Wagenen wrote a statement affirming the county’s commitment to following legal processes.\n\n“All five members of the Board of Supervisors and the Registrar of Voters are committed to safe, secure, accurate, and lawful elections in Riverside County. County election staff follow detailed procedures established by state and federal law to protect the integrity of the vote and to ensure that every eligible ballot is processed and counted in accordance with those legal requirements. The County and the Registrar of Voters will continue to comply with all lawful court orders and with all legal obligations applicable to election materials and election administration.”\n\n### Feb. 26: Attorney General Bonta questions affidavits\n\nIn a Feb. 26 letter to Bianco, California Attorney General Rob Bonta questioned two search warrants. One was issued Feb. 9, and the second Feb. 23. The affidavits underlying the search warrants contained no specific allegations of crime as required by law, and excluded information that would have informed the judges who signed the warrants, Bonta wrote. The California Department of Justice provided redacted copies of the letter to Inland Empire Law Weekly. The Sheriff’s Office provided unredacted copies to the Riverside Record, which the Record shared.\n\n“We (at the Office of the Attorney General) are concerned that the affidavits identify no specific felony offenses you have probable cause to believe were committed, nor do they identify particular persons whom you have probable cause to believe committed any such offenses, as required by Penal Code sections 1524(a)(4) and 1525. There also appear to be omissions of material facts in the affidavit that may have substantially interfered with the magistrate’s inference-drawing process,” Bonta wrote in a letter sent Feb. 26. The letter is available here.\n\n“In particular, your office did not apprise the magistrate that the Riverside County Registrar of Voters analyzed the key allegations underlying your investigation and reported to the Board of Supervisors at a public hearing on February 10, 2026 that the allegations are based on a misunderstanding of the relevant data.”\n\nThe letter asked Bianco to preserve all the ballots, and pause the investigation until Bonta’s office could review it. The letter also mentioned prior communication between the Department of Justice and the Sheriff’s Office.\n\n“We have tried unsuccessfully to work with you to understand the basis for this investigation. Today, Division of Law Enforcement Chief Stephen Woolery requested that you provide my office with copies of the affidavits supporting the probable cause determination for the subject warrants and briefly defer executing any warrants from the scheduled time of Friday, February 27, 2026 at 10 a.m. to March 6, 2026 so that we could better understand the basis for the search. We received the affidavits at 11:24 a.m. this morning. Instead of briefly delaying execution as Chief Woolery requested, however, we learned this afternoon that you accelerated your timeline and executed the warrants shortly after he made the request,” Bonta wrote.\n\n### March 4: Bonta tells Bianco not to recount ballots\n\nOn March 4, Bonta sent a follow up letter, saying he had not received a response from Bianco.\n\n“Earlier today, I learned that you intend to ignore my directives and plan to start counting the seized ballots tomorrow, March 5, 2026, using Sheriff’s Department staff members who are not trained and have no experience counting ballots. Let me be clear: this is unacceptable. Your decision to seize ballots and begin counting them based on vague, unsubstantiated allegations about irregularities in the November special election results sets a dangerous precedent and will only sow distrust in our elections. You are also flagrantly violating my directives, notwithstanding clear, express authority in the California Constitution and the Government Code giving the Attorney General ‘direct supervision’ over your office and authorizing me to ‘direct the activities of any sheriff relative to the investigation or detection of crime’ in the county,” Bonta wrote. The full letter is available here.\n\nBonta’s letter cited the California Constitution, Article V, Section 13, which says “The Attorney General shall have direct supervision over every district attorney and sheriff,” and Government Code Section 12560, which says “The Attorney General has direct supervision over the sheriffs.”\n\n### March 5: Bianco follows Bonta's direction\n\nOn March 5, Bianco responded to Bonta in an email obtained and shared by the Riverside Record.\n\n“This reply confirms I received last nights (sic) email. I can also confirm we are complying with the directive of the letter pending further communication with your office,” Bianco wrote. His email is available here.\n\n### March 6: Bianco asks for more information\n\nOn March 6, Bonta asked for all reports from investigator Robert Castellanos on the investigation, all reports from Sergeant James Merrill, the warrants and related affidavits from two earlier search warrants, correspondence between the Riverside Election Integrity Team and Castellanos, and all correspondence between the Sheriff’s Office and the Registrar of Voters that was described in Castellanos’ search warrant affidavits. He asked for the information by March 11. The full letter is available here.\n\n### Bianco challenges Bonta's supervision\n\nOn Friday, Bianco denied ever receiving offers to assist from Bonta.\n\n“At no time has AG Bonta offered assistance in determining the validity of the complaint, to quell concerns from the public or the task force. Additionally, neither AG Bonta nor our Secretary of State Shirley Weber ever showed concern or questioned a 45,000 vote discrepancy. Instead they expressed outrage and attempted intimidation to prevent this investigation from happening,” Bianco said.\n\nBianco said that Bonta was attempting to delay the investigation to better his political campaign.\n\n“The conversation that I had with them was extremely vague and aloof, and wanting me to do a favor and pause the investigation until March 6. Unfortunately, in what I’m doing outside of, as sheriff of Riverside County, I know that March 6 is the filing date for another Democrat to run against him in his next election for Attorney General,” Bianco said.\n\n### No conclusions yet\n\nBianco said he has reached no conclusions, and that a person should not believe everything they’re told without an investigation.\n\n“I’m not saying that anyone is lying, or that there is a series of mistakes. I am saying that we do not know. I am also saying that he (Tinoco) did not have a definitive answer of what happened. He gave his opinion of what he thought happened. What we all have to realize is that we’re investigators. Because someone tells you something, doesn’t mean you just, ‘oh, that person said he didn’t kill that person, so let’s move on and not investigate.’ It makes absolutely no sense to not continue an investigation, especially when both parties are so far apart,” Bianco said.\n\nIt is not clear whether Bonta or Bianco asked the judge to oversee the recount, or which judge is handling the case. The search warrants are sealed. The next step is for the court to designate someone to lead the recount.\n\nThe full press conference is available here.\n\nBonta’s letters are available here.",
  "title": "Court to supervise Riverside Sheriff’s Prop 50 vote recount",
  "updatedAt": "2026-03-22T13:59:11.723Z"
}