Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 1012055.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,697 chars

they had to be evicted. Id. at 799. The next day, the landlord gave her husband “a

6
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
State v. City of Sunnyside et al.
No. 101205-5

document that said [they] had to leave the house.” Id. Chagolla thought they were

evicted, so she left with her daughter—they had to sleep in her truck.

Chagolla’s landlord, Isabel Villa, believed the police were forcing her to evict

Chagolla’s family because of domestic violence, which “did not feel right” to Villa.

Id. at 807. She suggested talking to Chief Escalera; Chagolla recalls Escalera said

that Rivas “was in charge of the program and that he couldn’t do anything to help.”

Id. at 799. Escalera denies saying so. Though Chagolla thought she was evicted

because of the CFRHP, Villa did not pursue an eviction action against the family,

and Chagolla eventually returned to the home.

Heather and Rodney Francis

Heather and Rodney Francis received a three-day eviction notice from their

landlord after a police search of their rental home. It appears that neither of them

was charged with a crime related to this search, but Rivas claims the Francises had

prior criminal histories, and she told the landlord she would issue a CFRHP citation

“if the problems at the residence persisted.” 1 CP at 142. According to the Francises,

Rivas and Rivard threatened the landlord with a $1,000 fine if she did not evict them.

Three days later, Rivas came to the Francises’ house and told them they needed to

leave the premises and leave town by midnight, giving them just eight hours to do

so. They recall she said they “were gang members and druggies and that was why