← Back to All Cases
Overcharging

People v. James Jacobs — First Squatter Removal Prosecution

County: San Mateo Severity: 9.5/10

First-ever prosecution of a squatter removal operator in California history. DA Stephen Wagstaffe charged defendant with 7 felonies despite responding officer assessing incident as civil property dispute. Star witness has 11 pending firearms charges, burglary conviction, witness intimidation conviction, and a listed attorney who doesn't exist in the State Bar. Co-defendant with the gun offered 1 year; defendant with a sword offered 7 years.

Pending — Trial May 2026
Settlement / Damages
2026
Year
9.5
Severity / 10
San Mateo
County

The Incident

On January 6, 2026 at approximately 2:30 AM, a team of seven to eight individuals employed by ASAP Squatter Removal entered a property at 260 Allen Drive in San Bruno. The property had been legally sold by the Silvino and Magda Manzano Trust to Jae Holdings Inc in September 2025. The former owner's son, Silvino Manzano Jr., refused to leave despite having no lease, paying no rent, and being told by his mother to vacate. He brought four friends into the gutted property — a construction site with a $990,000 mortgage that had been "taken down to the studs."

The team used a battering ram on a side gate (not a door), then entered through an open window in the in-law suite. The responding officer, Corporal Anthony McKenna of San Bruno PD, initially classified the incident as a civil property dispute and released all ASAP personnel without arrest. McKenna later reclassified it to criminal after discovering ASAP's YouTube channel — an investigation he conducted while deliberately concealing it from the defendant for 13 days.

The Charges

DA Stephen Wagstaffe filed 9 felony counts — including two kidnapping charges that were dismissed at the preliminary hearing for insufficient evidence. The remaining 7 counts include first-degree burglary, two counts of assault with a semi-automatic firearm, and four counts of false imprisonment.

Critical detail: Jacobs had a katana sword, not a firearm. The complaint alleges he "personally used a HANDGUN" on three counts while simultaneously stating he was "NOT personally armed." These are mutually exclusive. The actual firearms belonged to co-defendant Angelmike Va Regalado — a convicted felon who is now a fugitive with a $50,000 warrant.

The Prosecution's Witnesses

Every prosecution witness has a criminal record:

The Investigating Officer

Corporal Anthony McKenna, the lead investigator, is a named defendant in a federal civil rights lawsuit — Vasquez v. Town of Colma (Case 3:21-cv-08255, N.D. Cal.) — filed while he was at his previous department. The lawsuit was still pending as of November 2025, just weeks before he investigated this case. McKenna's own sworn testimony at the preliminary hearing reveals he deliberately concealed his investigation from the defendant: "To keep the integrity of the investigation, I didn't want to allow him to know that I viewed the videos."

The DA's Pattern

DA Stephen Wagstaffe has held office since 2010 and has run unopposed in all four elections. His documented pattern includes:

The Co-Defendant Disparity

Co-defendant Arthur Gutierrez Jr. — who had an actual firearm held at low ready — was offered 1 year plus military diversion. Jacobs — who had a sword — was offered 7 years with no diversion. Same charges, same incident. The defendant without the gun gets 7x the sentence of the defendant with the gun.

The Property

260 Allen Drive was not a "family home" as the DA characterized it to the media. It was a gutted construction site with a $990,000 mortgage at 6.72% that had never been paid down. The family burned an estimated $337,000-$382,000 in interest and failed construction over four years. The mother tried to sell for over a year before finding a buyer. When the property finally sold, the son — who had no funds and nowhere to go — refused to leave, crawled back in through a window, and brought in four friends with a combined record of armed robbery, burglary, drugs, and child cruelty.

Why This Case Matters

This is the first prosecution of a squatter removal operator in California history. It comes at a time when 23+ states have passed legislation authorizing property owners to remove squatters — and California's own SB 448 (which would have created a legal removal process) failed in February 2026, just 17 days before the defendant's arraignment.

The DA is criminalizing what he himself called a civil matter in the Batmobile case. The lead investigator has a pending federal lawsuit. Every prosecution witness has a criminal record. The star witness faces more charges than the defendant. And the actual armed felon is a fugitive who has never been brought to justice.

Trial is set for May 8, 2026.

Take Action

How You Can Help

File a complaint about DA Wagstaffe with the California State Bar: calbar.ca.gov
Contact the AG: oag.ca.gov/contact — Request oversight of this prosecution
Share this case — Public awareness is the strongest check on prosecutorial power
Submit evidence: If you have information about DA Wagstaffe or this case, submit it here

Related Cases

Share This Case