Tenants Have Rights!
                    Lets ORGANIZE!

                            

ARRESTS on Record = 
                  Denials for Housing!

 
Do Arrest Records without convictions or charges keep people from getting housing?

We can do something about Unfair Tenant Screening!

Our region has seen a lot of impact of criminal background records leading to people being denied housing.  One element PEPP has focused on is that arrests on individual’s records, even without charges or a conviction has led to the individual not being able to rent an apartment.

This issue has been taken on by some statewide agencies and there is a plan to introduce legislation in the 2007 Minnesota Legislature that would expunge and seal the arrest records of individuals that have not been convicted or charged of a crime.

  Join us!  We invite you to do the following:

• Invite us to come and brief you on this issue (See Council on Crime and Justice Extensive Brief)

• Write a letter to endorse the legislation (See PEPP's Example)

• Read the background information and get involved (See Below)
  

• Ask other groups to endorse the legislation (Sample Letter and Instructions)

• Contact Local Legislators and ask them to vote YES when the Bills come up for a vote!

• Visit with our local legislators and ask them to vote yes on the bill

• Get people affected by this issue to join our group and have their stories and situation documented and their voice heard!

Contact PEPP if you want to get involved!
Call Duke at 218-236-5434

Allies, Advocates and especially those impacted
by this issue are welcome!

The following is information from the good folks at the Council on Crime and Justice

Statement of the Problem

The negative consequences of a criminal record are known both anecdotally and empirically.  These consequences are dramatic and largely a function of the expanded use of background checks in combination with the growing ability to gain electronic access to criminal justice records.

Criminal records, whether resulting from a conviction or a simple arrest, are easily accessed electronically, and are routinely used as screening mechanisms by employers, housing managers, credit agencies, and educational institutions, among others.  To compound the issue, the distinction between a conviction and an arrest is often unclear when looking at a person’s record.  The impact of this is enormous, particularly for young African American men.

Princeton Professor Devah Pager has demonstrated through rigorous research that a criminal record has serious negative implications for job seekers, particularly if they are persons of color. (Pager, Mark of a Criminal Record 2004). These barriers affect not only the individual and his or her family, but also whole communities.  The affect is largest in those communities where there are high concentrations of crime and of prisoner re-entry, and where, as a result, there is already diminished human, physical and social capital. 

 There are a number of inexpensive and simple ways that one can access an individual’s criminal record. At the county and municipal level, arrest records, records of dismissals, acquittals or convictions are available at the police agency or courthouse indefinitely. In addition, there are hundreds of private companies online that conduct criminal background checks on individuals for a small fee. Employers and landlords access these records. They make hiring or renting decisions based on records which can include arrests that were never charged, charges that were dismissed, and acquittals.  

Origin of the Problem

Criminal records are easily accessible to the public. Both non-conviction and conviction records are public and remain part of one’s criminal record indefinitely. For example, in Hennepin County in 2004, there were 46,806 misdemeanor level charges. In the same year, there were 28,818 dispositions that did not result in a conviction. All of this data is public and all of it can come up on a criminal background check. The following is a breakdown of the public accessibility to criminal record;
 

• Arrest Data:
  

• Arrest Data is both public and private, depending on which agency      maintains the data. Arrest data maintained at the arresting agency is public. The arresting agency may decide how long to keep this data. The Minneapolis Police Department holds public arrest data for 40 years. Arrest data stored at the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension is private. This data is available to third parties with the subject’s consent. Often, providing such consent is required in order for a job or housing application to be considered.

• Other Non-Conviction Data:
  
  

• Data on criminal proceedings resulting in a dismissal or acquittal remain public at the county level indefinitely. It also available on the private database at the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, accessible with the subject’s consent. 

• Conviction Data:
  
  

• Conviction data at the county level is public indefinitely.
• Conviction data at the state level (Bureau of Criminal Apprehension) is   public for 15 years following completion of the imposed sentence. Public information at the BCA is made available online, free of charge.

Under current law, individuals have two limited remedies available which either seal records or return records.

1.     Minn. Stat. § 299C.11 allows individuals to request from the BCA the return of “finger and thumb prints, photographs, distinctive physical mark identification data, information on known aliases and street names, and other identification data, and all copies and duplicates of them,” so long as they have not been convicted of a gross misdemeanor or a felony in the last ten years.  Not all arresting agencies return their arrest reports when this request is made.

2.     Minnesota Chapter 609A provides the grounds and procedures for the judicial sealing of certain criminal records. The court’s authority is limited to resolutions in which there was no admittance or plea of guilt, drug convictions pursuant to 152.18, and juveniles convicted of a crime after they have been certified as an adult. Expungements for these types of cases are granted nearly automatically. This process is extremely burdensome on the courts and is equally burdensome (or more so) and complicated for the individual seeking the expungement.

Proposed Solution

The proposed legislation is a balanced response to a serious, complex issue. The bill:

1.     Recognizes law enforcement’s need to have access to all records related to criminal justice. It does not inhibit law enforcement’s access to criminal records in any way. Sealed records remain available to law enforcement, city and county prosecutors, courts, and probation.

2.     Seals arrest data that does not lead to criminal charges. This sealing protects the presumption of innocence, ensuring that an individual who is arrested but not charged is not treated as if s/he is guilty of the charge.

3.     Seals case information regarding acquittals and dismissals. Again, this protects the presumption of innocence, ensuring that an individual who is acquitted or has charges against her/him dismissed is not treated as if s/he is guilty of the charge.

4.     Alleviates some of the expungement burden, which weighs heavily on courts and prosecutors.

5.     Excludes records associated with severe crimes or charges plus domestic abuse data. The exclusions are the following:

 o       Domestic Abuse;

o       Murder in the 1^st  through 3^rd degrees;

o       Manslaughter in the 1^st and 2^nd degrees;

o       Criminal Vehicular Homicide;

o       Assault in the 1^st through 3^rd Degrees;

o       Criminal Sexual Conduct (all degrees);

o       Indecent exposure;

o       Any drug offense that is punishable by a maximum sentence of 15 years or more;

o       DUI, leaving the scene of an accident, and reckless or careless driving.