Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon Found Not Guilty on All Charges

Lawfare in El Dorado County

Jury Deliberates Just 47 Minutes in Case Marked by Allegations of Political Motivation,

Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon’s legal ordeal in El Dorado County centered around their consulting work for the Pioneer Fire Protection District (PFPD) in 2011. They were contracted to assist the district with a parcel tax measure, Measure F, which ultimately passed with nearly 77% voter approval.

The El Dorado County District Attorney’s Office, led by Vern Pierson, filed a civil lawsuit against Dellinger and Alarcon in July 2012. The suit alleged that they had used taxpayer funds to advocate for the tax measure, a violation of California law prohibiting public agencies from spending public money on political campaigns . Dellinger and Alarcon contended that their activities were informational and that any advocacy was funded through private donations to a separate campaign committee .

The case was seen by many as politically motivated, especially given Dellinger’s history of managing campaigns for candidates not favored by Pierson and Auditor-Controller Joe Harn . After a three-day trial, the jury deliberated for just 47 minutes before returning a unanimous verdict of not guilty on all counts on May 14, 2014. [California Grand Jury News]

The swift acquittal was viewed by supporters as a vindication of Dellinger and Alarcon and a rebuke of what they perceived as politically driven prosecution. The case also sparked broader discussions about the use of public funds, political influence, and the importance of impartiality in legal proceedings within El Dorado County.

The Dellinger and Alarcon case could absolutely fall under what many now refer to as “lawfare.”

Lawfare is a portmanteau of “law” and “warfare,” describing the use of legal systems and institutions to damage or delegitimize an opponent, often for political gain, rather than for the impartial pursuit of justice.

In the case of Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon:

They were pursued by the El Dorado County DA over alleged misuse of public funds related to campaign consulting, despite their clear separation of public information from private campaign advocacy.
Their unusually swift acquittal—a unanimous 12-0 verdict after just 47 minutes—suggests the case may have lacked merit and, in the jury’s eyes, never should have been brought.
Political friend Sheriff John D’Agostini

Dellinger and Alarcon had political history that put them at odds with entrenched local officials like DA Vern Pierson and Auditor-Controller Joe Harn, leading many to interpret the prosecution as a retaliatory or suppressive political maneuver.

In short, the hallmarks of lawfare are all present:

Targeting political rivals through the legal system
Framing partisan disputes as legal violations
Using taxpayer-funded prosecutions to chill dissent or opposition

Challenge Coin of Former Sheriff Hal Barker

Today, this case would likely be held up as a textbook example of local-level lawfare—a term now widely used across the political spectrum to describe weaponized litigation in service of political goals.

After a protracted two-year legal battle by the El Dorado County District Attorney’s Office, Dan Dellinger and Cris Alarcon were found Not Guilty on all counts on May 14, 2014. In a case many viewed as politically motivated and rooted in a misapplication of the law, the jury returned a unanimous 12–0 verdict after just 47 minutes of deliberation. The swift outcome brought a resounding close to a saga that raised serious questions about prosecutorial misconduct and political revenge.