How did Modesto school district not hear of principal’s sex charges for over a year?
Brian Chubon, a former Modesto and Gustine principal, spent over a year fighting felony charges alleging sexual misconduct with a Merced County student. Because he was never arrested or booked, the case proceeded without his Modesto employer’s knowledge.
If Chubon had undergone the standard fingerprinting process, the Modesto City Schools district would have been notified, putting his job at risk, a legal expert says.
Chubon, 53, was vice principal at Gustine High School when he allegedly engaged in sexual acts, including intercourse, with a 17-year-old student in spring 2022.
The Gustine Unified School District conducted an internal investigation into their relationship at the time, but both denied anything inappropriate was happening between them. The district notified the student’s parents but did not contact child protective services or law enforcement.
Chubon continued to chaperone at school events, including prom and a senior trip, where more sexual impropriety with the minor allegedly occurred. Chubon left Gustine to work as vice principal of Mark Twain Junior High School in Modesto in July 2022.
Criminal charges were first filed against him in November 2024 after the student came forward earlier that year.
The Modesto school district did not learn about Chubon’s charges until he revealed them in a letter sent Jan. 9, 2026 — 13 months after he was criminally charged and five days before he was convicted.
This means Chubon continued to work at Modesto City Schools up until his conviction while the district remained in the dark and promoted him to principal at Roosevelt Junior High.
“It is the district’s understanding that Mr. Chubon was not arrested and therefore was not fingerprinted by local law enforcement… when the charges were filed in 2024,” MCS wrote in a statement to The Bee. “Had this occurred, the district would have received notification” through the Department of Justice.
Undisclosed investigation
Chubon applied to work at Modesto City Schools in March 2022.
Gustine High School Principal Adam Cano served as one of his references and answered “no” on a form when asked if Chubon had been, or was currently, the subject of any investigation of misconduct or abuse.
It is unknown the exact date the Gustine district began investigating Chubon’s relationship with the former student, only that it happened during spring of 2022.
MCS stated it would not have hired Chubon had it known about the internal investigation by Gustine.
Chubon was offered the job at MCS a week after he applied.
As part of the hiring process, all employees are fingerprinted through the state Department of Justice system. California law also requires that teachers receive background checks before credentialing.
Chubon was cleared and started working at Mark Twain Junior High in July 2022.
No arrest, so no notification to Modesto City Schools
After Chubon’s former student came forward in February 2024, the Gustine Police Department began investigating the allegations. Eight months later, the Merced County District Attorney’s Office filed a criminal complaint.
Chubon was issued a notice in November 2024 that he was being charged for “oral copulation of a person under 18” and “unlawful sexual intercourse.”
If a school employee who had been previously fingerprinted is ever arrested or booked, a notification is sent to the employer within 24 to 48 hours, according to the California DOJ.
State law also requires law enforcement to notify the district superintendent, the county superintendent of schools and the Commission on Teacher Credentialing upon the arrest of a school employee.
But because Chubon was never arrested, MCS did not receive notice. Instead, the district interviewed Chubon for a principal position, offering him the job in May 2025.
Merced County Chief Deputy District Attorney Katie Gates told The Bee that the complaint was filed upon review of an out-of-custody referral. She said that she does not know why Chubon was not arrested following the investigation and that it was not a decision made by the DA’s Office.
The Gustine Police Department did not respond to questions from The Bee.
In the complaint, the DA specifically requested for a notification letter to be mailed to the defendant. Chubon appeared at his arraignment, but had he not, the DA’s Office wrote that it would have requested an arrest warrant.
Moises Onsurez, spokesperson for the DA’s Office, stated that due to the delayed reporting of the alleged conduct, an arrest warrant was not sought. The office did not answer questions asking why a booking order — which would have entered Chubon’s information into the DOJ system and notified MCS — was never requested.
Onsurez just said the DA’s Office does not maintain a specific policy governing when a booking order is requested. He also admitted that the office was unaware Chubon was employed by a school district when the charges were filed.
In January, Chubon pleaded no contest to the charges and accepted the DA’s deal for a nonregisterable felony with no jail time and two years probation.
Gates said the DA’s Office analyzed the evidence and considered the victim’s wishes when making the offer.
“We took into consideration that the felony conviction would reflect that the defendant abused his position of power to victimize a minor and would put the public on notice that the defendant should not be entrusted with the care of children,” Gates said.
Only after Chubon was convicted on Jan. 14, 2026, was he ordered to schedule booking arrangements.
Richard Meyer, Chubon’s attorney, said that while defending the case, he was unaware that his client was still working at MCS. “That’s not my business,” Meyer said. “My business is to defend against the charges and resolve it in the most favorable way if possible.”
To date, MCS stated it has not received any complaints from district students and staff alleging misconduct by Chubon.
The former student filed a civil lawsuit at the end of January against the Gustine district, Chubon and the Merced County Office of Education arising from the alleged misconduct and the Gustine district’s failure to stop it and report it.
An unusual case
A person who’s arrested typically is booked and fingerprinted. These fingerprints get sent to the DOJ, which may then alert the defendant’s employer, and in this case, teacher credentialing authorities, too.
And if the defendant works with children, the DA’s Office could push for an order directing the person to stay away from minors pending resolution of the case.
Neither happened with Chubon.
Gabriel Chin, a law professor at UC Davis, said that while not everybody who is criminally charged needs to be arrested, fingerprinting and booking still need to be done.
Chin does not know all the facts of the case but said it was odd that Gustine police did not arrest Chubon based on the complaint.
Still, he said, the prosecutor would have seen that Chubon was out of custody at the arraignment and could have asked for detention and release conditions.
“It’s up to the police to arrest or not, but the prosecutor is not a potted plant here,” Chin said. “If the police don’t do what they want, they have options.”
According to the minutes from the December 2024 arraignment, Chubon was released on his own recognizance, meaning he can remain out of custody while his case is pending without paying cash bail or securing a bond. There was no request for a stay-away order.
Prosecutors and the court should have seen there was no prior booking, Chin said. He questioned why nobody followed up.
“People are busy. They’re working hard. Small department, under-resourced. It may well be that they don’t see these cases very often, and so they don’t have a lot of experience,” Chin said.
