Despite recent congressional reforms, federal legal services lawyers
continue to fight drug-related evictions from public housing. This includes
direct challenges to the “One Strike” policy which is strongly supported
by the Clinton Administration. In addition to public housing, legal services
has repeatedly thwarted drug-related evictions from private apartment units.
Florida Legal Services Fights Drug-Related Evictions
Florida Rural Legal Services (FRLS) is currently waging a major litigation
campaign to stop drug-related evictions from Florida public housing. Officials
implemented an aggressive eviction policy several months ago to rid public
housing of drug criminals and other problem tenants that have made such
housing synonymous with crime. The move is in direct response to President
Clinton’s “One-Strike” policy that allows beleaguered housing authorities
to evict residents who allow family members or guests to engage in criminal
activity. Much of public housing’s woes is due to tenants who permit relatives’
or friends to commit crimes. However, FRLS lawyers are fighting the new
policy. In just the last six months, FRLS has tried to stop five
drug-related evictions from the Palm Beach and Boca Raton housing authorities.
This includes one case involving a man who threatened to shoot a teenager.
See William Cooper, “’One Strike’ Public Housing Drug Policy
Backfires,” The Palm Beach Post, April 22 1997, pg. 1B
Fights Drug-Related Eviction in Texas Public Housing
The Laredo Legal Aid Society is currently stalling the eviction of a
Laredo public housing tenant arrested for possessing illegal narcotics.
The case began when Felipe Hinojosa was arrested for cocaine possession
and evading arrest. Although Hinojosa was not prosecuted, there was no
doubt that he was in possession of cocaine at the time of his arrest. Hinojosa
also admitted that he did run from the police when they first tried to
arrest him. In view of the evidence, housing officials sought to evict
Hinojosa. However, Laredo Legal Aid has taken up Hinojosa’s cause and is
attempting to stop the eviction.
See Hinojosa v. Housing Auth. of Laredo, Tex. App. Ct.,
1996
Kentucky Legal Services Stops Drug-Related Evictions
In 1995, the Legal Aid Society of Louisville, Kentucky stopped the eviction
of a man from a private apartment complex even though police found illegal
drugs in his residence during a search. The man targeted for eviction was
a recipient of Section 8 rental assistance. Section 8 is a program administered
by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that provides rental
assistance to low-income individuals. Despite the man’s obvious implication
in illegal drug activity, the Legal Aid Society filed suit to stop the
Village West Apartments from evicting him. Employing a legal tactic commonly
used by other legal services lawyers in such cases, Legal Aid argued that
the apartment owners couldn’t evict because they accepted Section 8 subsidies
after the discovery of the drugs. Under state common law, Legal Aid contended,
a landlord waives his right to evict if he accepts rent money after knowledge
of the tenant’s misconduct. A state circuit court ruled for Legal Aid and
halted the eviction.
See Village West Apartments v. Miles, Ky. Cir. Ct., July, 1995
Atlanta Legal Aid Opposes Public Housing Anti-Crime Efforts
In 1995, the Atlanta Legal Aid Society filed a class action lawsuit
against the Atlanta Housing Authority contending that its policy of automatically
denying housing to persons with a criminal history was illegal. The AHA
adopted a policy denying housing to individuals who had been convicted
of crimes or had been arrested within the past three years. As is often
done by other housing authorities, the AHA sought to insure that only safe,
responsible individuals were given housing. However, Atlanta Legal Aid
claimed this was unfair. The AHA and Legal Aid eventually settled the suit.
In exchange for continuing its screening process, the AHA had to guarantee
that all rejected applicants get a hearing before being denied an apartment.
The AHA also had to send Legal Aid monthly reports on the status of applications
by individuals with criminal histories.
See Bonner v. Alanta Housing Auth., N.D. Georgia, Oct. 1995
Eviction of Daytona Drug Criminal Stopped Over Technicality
In 1995, Central Florida Legal Services stopped the eviction of a private
housing tenant who had been convicted of illegal drug possession. The tenant
was a resident of Daytona Village Apartments under the federally-subsidized
Section 221 Below-Market Interest Rate (BMIR) housing program. After the
tenant was placed on probation for marijuana possession and a felonious
drug conviction, Daytona Village initiated eviction proceedings. Daytona
Village’s lease expressly prohibited drug-related criminal activity on
its premises. However, Central Florida Legal Services stopped the eviction.
It seems that the BMIR program had no federal regulations authorizing eviction
for drug crimes. Although HUD had such regulations governing public housing
and specific types of Section 8 housing, a county court ruled that the
lack of corresponding regulations for the BMIR program precluded drug-related
evictions.
See Daytona Village Apartments v. Neal, Volusia County Ct.,
July, 1995