Federal prosecutors are telling a judge they are not hanging their corruption case against recalled Oakland mayor Sheng Thao on a single cooperating witness, but on a thick stack of documentary and electronic records. In a new court filing this week, they push back hard on defense efforts to toss evidence seized during mid-2024 FBI searches and say many of the defense claims are overstated. Thao, her longtime partner Andre Jones, and businessmen David and Andy Duong have all pleaded not guilty and remain under indictment.
Prosecutors push back on suppression bids
In a detailed response filed in federal court, prosecutors say that by spring 2024, investigators had already gathered text messages, Apple Notes, calendar entries, financial records, and phone logs that they argue form the backbone of the case, rather than relying only on a cooperative witness. As reported by The Oaklandside, the U.S. attorney’s office accused the defense motions of “significant hyperbole” and called parts of the filings “hollow in substance.” Prosecutors also told the court they obtained court orders earlier in 2024 and used additional investigative leads to corroborate the documentary evidence.
What the indictment alleges
The Jan. 2025 indictment charges Thao, her partner Andre Jones, and California Waste Solutions executives David and Andy Duong with conspiracy, bribery, and related fraud offenses. Prosecutors allege the group promised to steer city contracts and advance a proposed purchase of modular housing in exchange for attack mailers and no-show payments. As with any indictment, the document alleges wrongdoing but does not establish guilt, and all four defendants have pleaded not guilty while the case moves through pretrial motions.
Timeline: raids and a messy falling-out
The probe burst into public view after FBI searches in June 2024 at Thao’s home and at multiple properties tied to the Duong family and their businesses, including suites on the Embarcadero. Coverage by the San Francisco Chronicle described the searches and the grand jury subpoenas that followed as the investigation widened. That reporting also details a bitter business split and a near-violent dispute involving a former partner whose later cooperation is referenced in the court papers.
Who is the informant?
In their filings, prosecutors refer to an unnamed cooperating witness described in court documents as a “co-conspirator.” Reporting has since identified that person as Mario Juarez. Prosecutors told the court that Juarez met with federal agents under a proffer agreement in June 2024 and that his accounts shifted at times. They argue, however, that the government did not rely solely on his statements, pointing to independently assembled documentary evidence and warrants obtained earlier in 2024. As detailed by The Oaklandside, defense attorneys counter that the warrants left out critical background about the informant and are asking the judge to suppress evidence seized from homes and electronic devices.
What this could mean in court
The government’s filing is designed to preserve the materials prosecutors say they need to bring the case to trial. A federal judge must now decide whether any of the warrants were defective or whether certain seized items should be excluded from the evidence jurors can see. The trial is set to begin in October 2026, according to court scheduling reported by KQED, so these suppression rulings could significantly shape how both sides present the story to the jury. If the judge throws out key evidence, prosecutors could still move forward on other counts, but the case would likely be narrowed and refocused before it ever reaches a verdict.
For now, the latest filings pull public attention back to the web of contracting and political relationships surrounding the Duong business network as the case grinds through a series of pretrial hearings on the way to next fall’s trial.
.jpg){kind=link}