Union Square Serial Robber Who Stabbed and Pistol-whipped Victim Receives Get-out-of-Jail Diversion From Judge Begert
With ultra-progressive Michael Begert’s judicial seat up for election in March of 2024, a group of San Franciscans launched a campaign endorsing a mainstream candidate. In a debate I attended, Begert repeatedly stated “I follow the law,” as if he had no alternative but to render decisions that erased defendants’ violent crimes.
An example of Begert’s unique interpretation of the law occurred on June 17, 2023. Sebastian Mendez attacked and struck one SFPD officer with a chain while numerous other officers tried to arrest him for breaking into a car. Video here.
Mendez subsequently failed to show up to court and a warrant was issued for his arrest. On September 26th, Mendez was arrested as he was again caught breaking into yet another car.
On November 16, 2023, Judge Begert instructed Mendez that he was going to drop the felony charges and instead send him to a mental health diversion program if a bed became available. Mental health diversion essentially means the car break-ins and assault on the SFPD officer would be deleted from Mendez’s record. In a December 4, 2023 article, I disclosed Begert’s game plan.
After reading my article, Begert rescinded mental health diversion for Mendez. On December 21st, Ann E. Dolan from the Superior Court Media Communications Office contacted me requesting that I retract my article because of Begert’s reversal. A judge changing his decision based on an article does not make that article incorrect. But at least Judge Begert covers his tracks when he is called out.
Judge Begert survived the March 2024 election and retained his seat.
Not changing his stripes, Judge Begert recently made an egregious decision by dropping charges on a Union Square serial robber, who stabbed and pistol-whipped one victim. Accordingly, in addition to narrating the facts of the case, for the judge’s benefit I am including a section on the law-- the penal code sections that Bergert should have applied to this case.
Wednesday December 11, 2024, Two Robberies
At 3:30 in the afternoon, Matthew had just left his job and was walking through the Stockton Tunnel towards Union Square and BART. In the west side of the tunnel, he was confronted by Luis Hernandez Santiago (27) dressed in a standard two-eleven uniform: mask, hoody, and black gloves. Luis pointed a gun at Matthew, racked the slide, and demanded Matthew surrender his cellphone and wallet. Matthew complied becoming Victim #1. In court testimony[1], Matthew said, he felt “shocked, terrified.”
Matthew said he subsequently saw “another person in the tunnel stopped by the same man or woman that stopped me, and I assumed that person was also being robbed.” That would be Axel from Guatemala. Axel, I’m sorry that our Union Square area is so dangerous.
Per SFPD Officer Hernandez’ testimony,[2] she interviewed Axel who told her that Luis displayed a gun, demanded his cellphone and wallet. Axel complied becoming Victim #2. Axel expressed to Officer Hernandez that he was scared.
The immediate problem for SFPD, Luis got away.
SFPD Central Station’s December 11th response, lays the groundwork
SFPD Officer William Ma testified[3] that he responded to the aftermath of the robbery in the Stockton Tunnel and was able to trigger Matt’s Apple account to show the stolen iPhone was within a 30-foot radius of Clay and Kearny Streets. Then Matt’s wife was able to activate an audible sound from the stolen iPhone. SFPD found Matt’s iPhone in a garbage can. And you guessed it, SFPD next obtained video surveillance of the suspect discarding Matthew’s iPhone in the garbage.
That’s some good police work!
Friday, December 13, 2024, two attempted robberies, a pistol-whip, and a stabbing
Back in the Stockton Tunnel, two days later, at 3:45 in the afternoon[4], Anton said he saw Luis approaching, with Cynthia Guadalupe Ruiz Gonzalez (27) trailing behind.
Like the robbery of Matthew, Luis demanded Anton’s cellphone and wallet. Anton, Victim #3, said he didn’t have one. Luis then pointed his gun at Anton’s mom, Victim #4, Galiya, and demanded her cellphone and wallet. Anton heroically manned up and “tried to grab the gun and point it away from both of us.”[5]
Luis responded by using the butt of the gun to strike Anton in the head “approximately 5 to 10 times.”[6] Anton testified that after the blows to the head, “I was jumped by another individual (Cynthia). She had a knife and stabbed me a couple times in the back as well as another stab in the neck.”[7]
Immediately after striking Anton, Luis and Cynthia fled without obtaining Anton or his mother’s property.
Per the SFPD incident report,[8] Anton had two one-inch puncture wounds in his back and one one-inch puncture wound in his neck that were actively bleeding. Anton was transferred by medics to General Hospital. In court testimony, Anton said that he “had a tube inserted in my lung because my lung collapsed and they had to get the blood out to stabilize me.”
December 13th aftermath of robberies, Central Station officers make an arrest
Undercover officers Montague and McAuliffe were traveling on Kearny Street when they thought they recognized the suspect, Luis, and Cynthia. The couple was hustling towards BART, heads on swivels looking for SFPD, five feet apart to create the appearance they weren’t together. Both Montague and McAuliffe had viewed Officer Ma’s surveillance video of Luis dumping Matt’s iPhone in the Clay Street garbage.
Undercovers followed Luis and Cynthia as they boarded a BART train for their commute home to their respective homes in San Lorenzo and Hayward. Officers Christensen and Montague arrested the couple in a BART car before the train left the city and would have passed by Judge Michael Begert’s East Bay residence.
Officer McAuliffe searched Luis’ black satchel and found a Glock 17 Austrian gun with a serial number. To be clear, the gun was only a replica gun. That does not negate the fear the gun instilled in the victims and the slam dunk meeting of the “fear” element necessary to classify this as a robbery. Nor did Anton’s suspected blood on Luis’ shoes reduce his aiding and abetting of Cynthia’s knife work.
During the search of Luis, his apparent methamphetamine glass pipe fell to the ground and shattered. Of all the facts presented here, this would be the only fact Judge Begert would focus on.
This wasn’t good police work; this was great police work! One would assume that Chief Yep is going to honor these officers with meritorious awards.
The Law, for purposes of judges that claim they follow the law
1) December 11, 2025, robbery on Victim #1 and Victim #2:
California Penal Code Section 211, defines a robbery as the felonious taking of personal property (cellphones and wallets) in the possession of another (Matthew and Alex), against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear (Matthew was “shocked and terrified,” while Axel expressed, he was “scared.”) For a robbery such as I have described, the California Penal Code Section 213(a)(2) prescribes a sentence “punishable in state prison for two, three, or five years.”
2) December 13, 2025, the double attempted robbery on Anton (Victim #3) and his mother (Victim #4):
California Penal Code Section 213(b): While technically, the absence of property being taken from Anton and his mother means these were not straight robberies. However, Section 213 (b) clearly states that in conjunction with Penal Code Section 664, an “attempted robbery is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or five years.”
California Penal Code Section 245(a)(2) fiats, “Any person who commits an assault upon the person of another with a firearm shall be punished by imprisonment in state prison for two, three, or four years. Clearly, Luis’ pistol-whipping of Anton meets this ticket-to-state-prison statute.
California Penal Code Section 182 defines that when two or more people conspire to commit a crime together, they are both equally guilty of the same felony. Thus, when Cynthia started stabbing Anton, Luis was equally culpable. The intention of the statute is to remove the excuse, “I thought we were just going to rob the Brink’s truck, I didn’t know my partners were going to kill two Nyack police officers and a security guard.”
Under the conspiracy provisions and for the seriousness of the stabbing, SFPD booked both Luis and Cynthia attempted (California Penal Code Section 664) murder (California Penal Code Section 187).
If you add up the state prison terms for all of Luis’ crimes, it looked like Luis will be going away for a long, long, time.
Preliminary Hearing
To determine if probable cause existed that Luis and Cynthia committed these crimes, a preliminary hearing was held on January 3, 2025, before Judge Brian Ferrall in Department 13. It appears that the attempted murder charge was changed to an aggravated assault. Nevertheless, Judge Ferrall ruled that sufficient probable cause existed that Luis and Cynthia had committed the crimes, and directed the case to proceed in Department 22.
But how did the case end up in Department 8?
Diversion Court, erasing the violent crimes from Luis’ resume
Per the Department 8, April 14, 2025 transcripts, it appears Judge Begert’s was influenced by SF Public Defender Alejandra Ramirez’s request to make Luis’ extremely violent case completely vanish if he completes a substance abuse program.
Begert reviewed Assistant DA John Delgado’s written objection to Luis being sent to diversion. In the transcripts, Delgado also said, Anton, the victim of the stabbing/pistol-whipping case, was opposed to Luis receiving the get-out-of-jail diversion card. Axel had returned to Guatemala. And Delgado had not been able to connect with Matthew.
It’s an easy guess that Begert sided with the public defender.
Judge Begert believes in second chances to second chances
Per the San Francisco Chronicle their Editorial Board endorsed Begert retaining his seat in the March 2024 election. Begert and the Chronicle made a big deal about Begert never giving a criminal more than one second chance in diversion.
In the court transcripts, Luis stated that because he was on criminal probation in the East Bay, he was previously directed twice to substance abuse diversion programs with El Chante in Oakland. Luis said he relapsed the first time “because there wasn’t really any structure to the program.” The second time he relapsed because “I got family, my daughter.” Luis, way to grow up and accept the responsibility of being a father.
Though Begert told the Chronicle that he doesn’t give second chances, he effectively gave Luis a third chance at drug diversion. A false campaign promotion by the judge to an overly guidable Chronicle’s editorial staff. Begert assigned, Luis, an East Bay resident, to San Francisco’s Father Alfred program. Luis’ third drug diversion program in three years. Judge Begert was also ensuring Luis would keep returning to crime and drug-fertile San Francisco—the city where Begert does not reside.
This is evidence of Begert’s overconfidence that he has superior knowledge to East Bay judges on which diversion programs work the best.
Begert does not follow the law
Consistent with Begert’s self-assessment that he is an expert in diversion programs; he also mislead the public that he follows the law. In the court transcripts, not only did Begert ignore all the penal code penalties at his disposal to hold Luis accountable, but he did also not attribute any of Cynthia’ stabbings to Luis under the conspiracy section of the penal code (Section 182). But in his campaign, Begert claimed he follows the law.
These robberies were committed by an East Bay person commuting to San Francisco’s Union Square. This follows a San Francisco 49er getting robbed a few blocks away by an East Bay person commuting to San Francisco’s Union Square. The NFL victim was pre-Mayor Lurie, but our mayor has focused millions of dollars protecting our tourist-starved Union Square from crime. Contrastingly, to keep the Union Square robbery industry thriving, Judge Begert, an East Bay resident, ensured that there were would be no consequences for Luis’ four robberies, pistol-whipping, and stabbing.
Nowhere in the SFPD report or in the court transcripts was there any allegation that Luis appeared under the influence of alcohol or drugs. That was all just another fabrication by the SF Public Defender’s Office’s fiction factory and sold to a judge that has no vested interest in San Francisco.
So for all you young aspiring criminals enrolled in the Gangster Academy training, remember, if you intend to commit a heinous crime in San Francisco, make sure to drop a meth pipe when you get arrested. It can be a get-out-of-jail card with some SF judges.
[1] Court #’s: 24 0232/ 24 23300. Dept 13, January 3, 2025, before the Honorable Judge Brian Ferrall
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] #240.769.517
[5] January 3, 2025 testimony in Department 13
[6] Incident report #: 240.769.517
[7] January 3, 2025 testimony in Department 13
[8] Incident report 240.769.517
Good reporting as usual Lou. Begert is such a POS. SF will never be safe until these Marxist judges are voted out.
Good work, Lou! Judge Begert sounds like a menace! I'm forwarding your article to AG Bondi, in the hopes that the mean guy will soon send some guardmen to SF to help protect ccitizens from such as Begert!