Case: 17-11500 Date Filed: 10/29/2019 Page: 1 of 20 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-11500 ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 5:15-cv-02325-AKK SHEENA YARBROUGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus DECATUR HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama _______________________ (October 29, 2019) Before WILLIAM PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and VRATIL,* District Judge. WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judge: * Honorable Kathryn H. Vratil, United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation. Case: 17-11500 Date Filed: 10/29/2019 Page: 2 of 20 This appeal requires us to decide whether, under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, some evidence supported the decision of the Decatur Housing Authority to terminate Shenna Yarbrough’s housing voucher issued under Section 8 of the Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437f. The Authority terminated her voucher because she had “violated her agreement with the Authority and her lease by engaging in drug-related criminal activity.” Yarbrough filed a complaint against the Authority, id. § 1983, that the termination violated both a federal regulation providing that “[f]actual determinations” in a voucher- termination hearing “shall be based on a preponderance of the evidence,” 24 C.F.R. § 982.555(e)(6), and the constitutional right to due process of law. The district court granted summary judgment to the Authority. A panel of this Court reversed because the indictments and arrest records presented at the hearing failed to establish that Yarbrough engaged in drug-related criminal activity under the preponderance standard, but we later vacated that decision and reheard that issue en banc. Yarbrough v. Decatur Hous. Auth. (Yarbrough I), 905 F.3d 1222, 1226 (11th Cir. 2018), rev’d en banc, 931 F.3d 1322 (11th Cir. 2019). The en banc court overruled our earlier precedent, Basco v. Machin, 514 F.3d 1177 (11th Cir. 2008), which underpinned the panel’s decision, but it left it to the panel on remand to address Yarbrough’s remaining due process arguments. We now affirm the summary judgment in favor of the Authority. 2 Case: 17-11500 Date Filed: 10/29/2019 Page: 3 of 20 I. BACKGROUND Sheena Yarbrough was a qualified participant in the Section 8 Housing Assistance program operated by the Decatur Housing Authority under the administration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The Section 8 program provides low-income families assistance with rental payments. 42 U.S.C. § 1437f(a). Public housing authorities have the power to terminate assistance under Section 8 if any member of a participating family engages in drug-related criminal activity. 24 C.F.R. § 982.551(l); see also id. § 982.553(b)(1)(iii). The regulatory requirement to refrain from drug-related criminal activity was incorporated into the terms of Yarbrough’s agreement with the Authority. To obtain housing benefits, she signed a document issued by the Department of Housing and Urban Development entitled “Obligations of the Participating [F]amily,” which provided that “members of the family may not engage in drug-related criminal activity.” In September 2012, Yarbrough was arrested for selling Xanax and Lortab to an undercover police informant. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals