iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Sacramento Homeless Take City To Court Over Seizure Of Possessions

Sacramento Homeless

First Posted: 05/10/11 10:39 PM ET Updated: 07/10/11 06:12 AM ET

Dozens of homeless people will soon take the stand in a Sacramento, Calif. courtroom to share their experiences of having their personal possessions seized by local authorities.

The rare case highlights the often untold struggles of homeless Americans attempting to create makeshift homes for themselves in a climate where law enforcement policies target them and their rights are ambiguous.

The civil class action lawsuit brought before federal court represents all homeless people in Sacramento whose possessions were taken in police sweeps since 2005, The Sacramento Bee reports. The period of time includes the highly publicized closure of the "Tent City" homeless encampment.

Approximately 20 people are expected to testify, but the case touches many more. So far, over 60 homeless men and women have filed depositions and the case could end up including 2,000 plaintiffs total, KCRA reports.

Each one has their own story of how their belongings were taken and what they lost. Some had tents, sleeping bags and other necessities confiscated; others lost sentimental possessions.

According to The Sacramento Bee,

Among the items she lost that day, [Linda McKinley] said, were her identification card, eyeglasses, medication, legal papers and photographs.

"I just lost everything," she said. "It was really devastating. It was like losing my house in a sense. It was like I had been stripped."

A homeless veteran, Kendall Gabriel, told The Sacramento Bee that his medals, a Silver Star and a Purple Heart, were among the items police confiscated from him.

Prosecuting attorney Mark Merin charges that Sacramento authorities violated the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs by seizing property. Merin says that items were taken without sufficient notification and destroyed -- instead of giving the homeless opportunities to reclaim them. California law mandates property be kept for 90 days so that owners are able to retrieve their possessions.

In an interview with KCRA News, Merin said:

"I think the city had a mandate to clean up areas where homeless people were living. And it felt that the easiest way to do it was just to take the stuff and toss it."

City officials meanwhile argue that police officers were only doing their job by enforcing laws that restrict people from camping for more than 24 hours in areas not designated as campgrounds. They also deny that the police force routinely destroyed or discarded property.

In the case of the dissolution of the tent city specifically, the city says that residents were given weeks of advanced notice -- and had the opportunity to relocate their belongings, but chose not to.

In its most simplistic form, the case begs the question: what rights do the homeless have?

While the prosecution says rights were violated, Sacramento government officials say that the constitutional rights of the homeless were upheld and they were treated no differently that any other citizens.

While instances of homeless people claiming the confiscation of their property is common across America, cases like this rarely make it to trial for a variety of reasons.

The homeless are socially ostracized, making it difficult for them to have proper venues to take issues of discrimination to court.

Even if legal advocates want to help, organizing a group of individuals without permanent addresses or contact information can be a challenge to pulling together a case.

A similar class action suit filed by the ACLU in San Diego was settled out of court. Like the Sacramento case, the lawsuit charged that police conducted raids in which they illegally confiscated and destroyed things belonging to the homeless.

The city of San Diego agreed to open a storage facility to house all confiscated property, so that homeless owners would be able to get back their items.

Whether this solution will play a part in the Sacramento decision is unclear, but the groundbreaking case's outcome could have wider-reaching implications for the homeless beyond California's capital.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST IMPACT

Dozens of homeless people will soon take the stand in a Sacramento, Calif. courtroom to share their experiences of having their personal possessions seized by local authorities. The rare case highlig...
Dozens of homeless people will soon take the stand in a Sacramento, Calif. courtroom to share their experiences of having their personal possessions seized by local authorities. The rare case highlig...
Filed by Erica Liepmann  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 47
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
09:29 AM on 05/12/2011
If the homeless want to have a never ending soap opera that in the end will mean more bull s... and nothing will change or they can do what the vietnamese monks did as an act of protest? They can do self immolation right in front of their congressmens office or on the capital steps in Washington DC etc.. So -You- want to die a real man with a purpose or slink away and quietly die from -Suicide- or waste away etc. and let the bureaucrats and politicians continue to screw our brave military veterans and other homeless human beings? Fight the only way they will understand and be forced to do something meaningful...
12:40 PM on 05/13/2011
Huh? John should not be speaking......
01:00 AM on 05/12/2011
The wealthy would send them to gas chambers, if they could.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
glockman
05:46 PM on 05/14/2011
What nonsense. How about contributing something useful to the discussion?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
07:24 PM on 05/11/2011
If they were given enough time to clear their property, then their rights were not violated. It's the same when code compliance officers order property owners to clear their property of flammable brush, trash, old cars, etc.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brokerallen
The Middle Class Needs To Take Back America
05:11 PM on 05/11/2011
They should not be homeless to begin with.
makemesmile
it makes you wonder
11:08 PM on 05/12/2011
No one should be homeless, but there are a lot of people, including children who do not have a home of their own for various reasons. Human rights should guarantee a home for everybody.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:22 PM on 05/11/2011
This is the GOP plan for all of us.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
flic fleurette
my micro-bio is chock full of opinions
07:59 PM on 05/11/2011
It's a shame and a tragedy that Americans who fought for their country are now homeless and to add insult to injury, have their meagre belongings confiscated. God bless America indeed.
Instead of giving tax cuts to the rich and corporations who pocket the money, why not build cheap housing for the homeless, it's the Christian thing to do. America cannot refer to herself as a Christian country when it treats its citizens so badly.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
09:47 PM on 05/12/2011
fanned.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
knightoftheroundtable
Old Knight without porfolio or armor
03:12 PM on 05/11/2011
I guess the only people that really matter in America is who the uber wealthy deem as needed for their enrichment. Guess unemployed and homeless do not meet their criteria, can't take any money where none exist.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Jabandit
In vino veritas.
02:49 PM on 05/11/2011
In times like these, you need to encourage and properly manage these "tent cities".
01:39 PM on 05/11/2011
I had not thought about this issue from a Constitutional standpoint. Unlawful searches and seizures are basic rights conferred upon any citizen, but the homeless have had few opportunities to press their case. When you think about the issues, and then try to put yourself in their place, you understand that there is no place of "rest", no peace of mind. We are all vulnerable and under threat of loss of society's concern and respect.

It used to be that only the "landed" citizens had the right to vote. Now, people without a telephone number or a permanent address are stripped of this right. We have to care enough to protect our neighbors, who just don't have a permanent domicile to protect them from the cold and the criminal element that prey on the weak. Say hello to the street people. Carry a few dollars in a special pocket. You only have to smile in order to reach out. I'm not worried about how the money is going to be spent. My only concern is that I have touched another's life as gently as I could.
01:54 PM on 05/11/2011
Your not worried about how the money you give to the homeless is spent?
What if it's for drugs or booze?
photo
Salanry
We are what we pretend to be, so we must be carefu
04:40 PM on 05/11/2011
Families are the fastest growing demographic of the homeless population.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Akizme72
Lace Up Hike On Go Off the Beaten Trails
05:16 PM on 05/11/2011
I know your question is not addressed to me, but I would like to answer it anyway.
I, for one, am not worried about what homeless people do with the money I give them.
Yes, it is my money, but as soon as I give it over (whether to a homeless person or to the government for that matter) it ceases to be my property and I have no rights to dictate the person I am giving it to, to do this or that with it, but not that or that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sunshine saguaro
for you, a thousand times over
01:19 PM on 05/11/2011
Yeah, because taking away all of their stuff will definitely help the homeless problem! Oh wait...no.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edgarcaycedoc
06:15 PM on 05/11/2011
Oh they are willing to address the homeless problem. They just can't decide whether or not to give them 20 or 25 years. (Sarcasm)
12:19 PM on 05/11/2011
Why seize the property and then store it so that people can reclaim it? Wouldn't it be easier to not seize it in the first place? In my business I have found the government to be the biggest problem when it comes to helping the homeless. One of my properties has a large backyard where I would like to build a garage with an apartment on the second floor. I can't legally do it because it is zoned for only one house. At the same time my city "leaders" keep talking about creating more high density housing and more affordable housing for the poor. The only density is in their heads.
photo
Salanry
We are what we pretend to be, so we must be carefu
04:42 PM on 05/11/2011
Have you looked into your cities rezoning policies? Sometimes you have petition the city planner and/or city council, but I have had friends in similar situations. They were able to resolve the issue, it was a pain in the @ss though...
04:58 PM on 05/11/2011
The pain you refer to is why I don't bother.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edgarcaycedoc
06:16 PM on 05/11/2011
Is there any possibility that the powers that be would grant you a "variance???"
06:29 PM on 05/11/2011
Yes and wouldn't that be merciful if our masters would grant me a variance?
09:18 AM on 05/11/2011
We are measured by how we treat the least among us. Terrible. They are human beings, not disposable wipes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pissdoffinohio
spelling is over-rated.....somtimes its medicl rel
07:03 AM on 05/11/2011
For F's sake.
Good job Sacramento.
05:24 PM on 05/11/2011
This attorney mentioned, Mark Merin is very involved in the homeless issues in Sacramento. If I'm not mistaken he bought land and moved homeless people onto it and the city he could no longer to that. Unbelievable huh?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rasputin66
504 reppin and 504 steppin
02:38 AM on 05/11/2011
The government has no respect for our veterans. This is heart-breaking.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hairydodger
02:34 AM on 05/11/2011
It's as if it is 1934 all over again. Back off California. Now is not the time to pound the homeless. Actual there is never a time to pound the homeless.
photo
CubfanBudman
He Ain't Heavy, He's my Brother
02:30 AM on 05/11/2011
If the police didn't have warrents, I hope they pay through the nose.

If the police had warrents and didn't wait 90 days before destroying property, I hope they pay.

We have a 4th amendment. The state can't take your stuff without a court order. This is basic civics.