2145. 4. at 535-36, 88 S.Ct. He was arrested for sleeping on the street and also on an outstanding warrant. Other courts likewise appear to have reached the merits of similar suits where homeless plaintiffs had not suffered convictions. The decision in the case, Jones v. 1983. of Mayors, A Status Report on Hunger and Homelessness in America's Cities 2002 at 312 (indicating that people remain homeless an average of six months in survey cities).4 In addition, the justices in Powell who were troubled by the statute at issue there, which made it a crime to be found intoxicated in public, thought it was problematic because a chronic alcoholic has a compulsion to drink wherever he is. As Justice White's concurrence in Powell explains: I do not question the power of the State to remove a helplessly intoxicated person from a public street, although against his will, and to hold him until he has regained his powers. 1861 (Stevens, J., dissenting) (Nor is this an Eighth Amendment Case. Thus, in Hawkins v. Comparet-Cassani, we relied upon the above Ingraham dicta in holding that plaintiffs who had not been convicted lacked standing under the Eighth Amendment to challenge the use of electric stun belts during court proceedings, a claim that arose under the first two protections of the Clause. 1401, and reiterated this position in Graham, 490 U.S. at 392 n. 6, 109 S.Ct. Robert Lee Purrie has tried to find shelter in Skid Row and been told that there are no beds available. 2145 (Fortas, J., dissenting) (noting that like the addict in Robinson, an alcoholic is powerless to avoid drinking to the point of intoxication and once intoxicated, to prevent himself from appearing in public places). Appellants seek only prospective injunctive relief, not damages. The district court relied exclusively on the analysis of Robinson and Powell by another district court in Joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, in which plaintiffs challenged certain aspects of San Francisco's comprehensive homelessness program on Eighth Amendment grounds. cited them for violating section 41.18(d). Goldman, 295 F.Supp. The key issue is whether the plaintiff is likely to suffer future injury. Id. And unless Robinson is so viewed it is difficult to see any limiting principle that would serve to prevent this Court from becoming, under the aegis of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the ultimate arbiter of the standards of criminal responsibility, in diverse areas of the criminal law, throughout the country. Health & Safety Code 11721). When they lack money for a motel room, they take the bus to a shelter in South Los Angeles. The City challenges Appellants' standing for the first time on appeal. at 534-35, 88 S.Ct. See, e.g., City of Revere v. Mass. Id. spanish teaching jobs in luxembourg. Angeles Superior Court Case No. The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) is the nation's largest municipally-owned utility, providing safe, reliable and affordable electric and water service to nearly 4 million people. Joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, 846 F.Supp. 1401. His average. See Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1339 (11th Cir.1994) (opinion suggests but does not state that plaintiffs had not suffered convictions); Pottinger v. City of Miami, 810 F.Supp. The Joyce plaintiffs made only the conclusory allegation that there was insufficient shelter, id. 462], and In re Smith, 143 Cal. 1. Appellants are entitled at a minimum to a narrowly tailored injunction against the City's enforcement of section 41.18(d) at certain times and/or places. See, e.g., Philadelphia, Pa., Mun.Code 10-611(1)(b)-(c), (2)(g)-(h) (2005) (prohibiting sitting or lying in certain designated zones only); Reno, Nev., Mun.Code 8.12.015(b) (2005) (similar); Seattle, Wash., Mun.Code 15.48.040 (similar). 2. Naslovna stranica; O nama; Proizvodi. No. Id. Thus, contrary to the City's and the dissent's argument, Ingraham does not establish that the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause only attaches postconviction. BC536272, pursuant to Section 54956.9(d)(l) of the California Government Code. The district court erred by not engaging in a more thorough analysis of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence under Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 82 S.Ct. Joyce, however, was based on a very different factual underpinning than is present here. At the time, according to the lawsuit, Jones was in his early 20s, living in a one-bedroom apartment in Van Nuys, without a washer, dryer, dishwasher or central air conditioning. As homeless individuals, Appellants are in a chronic state that may have been acquired innocently or involuntarily. Robinson, 370 U.S. at 667, 82 S.Ct. Notwithstanding this well-established Supreme Court authority, the City urges us to follow the Fifth Circuit, which has based its rejection of an Eighth Amendment challenge by homeless persons on the absence of a conviction. There is obviously a homeless problem in the City of Los Angeles, which the City is free to address in any way that it sees fit, consistent with the constitutional principles we have articulated. This protection governs the criminal law process as a whole, not only the imposition of punishment postconviction. officers cited Purrie for violating section 41.18(d). If you are having issues accessing your account, please contact our Rates Application Group at (213) 367-4709. As L.A.P.D. Patricia and George Vinson, a married couple, were looking for work and a permanent place to live when they were cited for violating section 41.18 (d). at 568 n. 31, 88 S.Ct. Auth., supra, at 2-14. L.Rev. 2145 (Fortas, J., dissenting) (emphasis added). at 551, 88 S.Ct. 2145, and because Powell was powerless to avoid public drunkenness, the dissenters concluded that his conviction should be reversed, see id. The person's own safety and the public interest require this much. The term Skid Row derives from the lumber industry practice of building a road or track made of logs laid crosswise over which other logs were slid. at 669-71, 97 S.Ct. The City asserts for the first time on appeal that the homeless persons who pursue this Eighth Amendment action lack standing because they were never convicted of violating the ordinance. She was close to an electrolier consisting of a cast iron base about 3 feet high and a lamppost with crossarms supporting five large light globes. I also disagree with the majority's conclusion that all that is required for standing is some direct injury-for example, a deprivation of property, such as a fine, or liberty, such as an arrest-based on the plaintiff's violation of the statute, maj. op. at 567, 88 S.Ct. Jones and the others sued the City of Los Angeles and its police department, claiming that the ordinance violated their Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment.. Neither of the two 1969 district court opinions cited by the majority, maj. op. 2145. Accordingly, in determining whether the state may punish a particular involuntary act or condition, we are guided by Justice White's admonition that [t]he proper subject of inquiry is whether volitional acts brought about the condition and whether those acts are sufficiently proximate to the condition for it to be permissible to impose penal sanctions on the condition. Powell, 392 U.S. at 550 n. 2, 88 S.Ct. FindLaw.com Free, trusted legal information for consumers and legal professionals, SuperLawyers.com Directory of U.S. attorneys with the exclusive Super Lawyers rating, Abogado.com The #1 Spanish-language legal website for consumers, LawInfo.com Nationwide attorney directory and legal consumer resources. 1660 (standing requires a direct injury). [1] The Supreme Court, in Muskopf v.Corning Hospital District (1961) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. However, there is no showing in this case that shelter was unavailable on the night that any of the six was apprehended. Homeless individuals, who may suffer from mental illness, substance abuse problems, unemployment, and poverty, are unlikely to have the knowledge or resources to assert a necessity defense to a section 41.18(d) charge, much less to have access to counsel when they are arrested and arraigned. As the Los Angeles City Attorney has publicly stated, The tragedy of homelessness is compounded by indifference. Anat Rubin, Jobs, Not Jails, Skid Row Protesters Shout at Politicos, L.A. Daily J., Feb. 22, 2006, at 1 (quoting the City Attorney). It agreed with Judge Jensen's analysis in Joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, 846 F.Supp. The majority sees it differently, concluding that the Eighth Amendment forbids the City of Los Angeles from enforcing an ordinance which makes it unlawful to sit, sleep, or lie on sidewalks. at 567, 88 S.Ct. See Robinson, 370 U.S. at 665-67, 82 S.Ct. In United States v. Kidder, 869 F.2d 1328 (9th Cir.1989), a defendant convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute argued that he was being unconstitutionally punished because of his status as a mentally ill drug addict. See also Johnson, 61 F.3d at 445 (finding that plaintiffs who had not been convicted of violating a sleeping in public ordinance lacked standing to challenge it on Eighth Amendment grounds). at 550 n. 2, 88 S.Ct. Because Powell was convicted not for his status as a chronic alcoholic, but rather for his acts of becoming intoxicated and appearing in public, the Powell plurality concluded that the Clause as interpreted by Robinson did not protect him. 2145 (White, J., concurring in the judgment). Kartonska ambalaa. Annabelle Jones, plaintiff and appellant, was standing on the sidewalk at the southwest corner of Spring and Eighth Streets, in Los Angeles. at 1138. This is the only study in the record (others referred to by the majority are not), and it does not indicate that Los Angeles was among the cities surveyed. Jan. 30, 1979.] BC577267, pursuant to Section 54956.9(d)(l) ofthe California Government Code. See Mayor's Citizens' Task Force, supra, at 5. In any event, there is a difference between the protection afforded by the Eighth Amendment, and protection afforded by the Fourteenth. 1401; and the State does not acquire the power to punish with which the Eighth Amendment is concerned until after it has secured a formal adjudication of guilt in accordance with due process of law, id. Yet the monthly welfare stipend for single adults in Los Angeles County is only $221. Contrary to the plurality, the dissent read Robinson as standing on the principle that [c]riminal penalties may not be inflicted upon a person for being in a condition he is powerless to change. Id. 23 of Water & Power (Case No. Here, the majority holds that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the City from punishing involuntary sitting, lying, or sleeping on public sidewalks that is an unavoidable consequence of being human and homeless without shelter in the City of Los Angeles. Maj. op. at 848. Id. Also, in the rare case exemplified by Robinson, the status being criminalized is an internal affliction, potentially an innocent or involuntary one. Called the Matrix Program, the homelessness program was an interdepartmental effort [utilizing] social workers and health workers [and] offering shelter, medical care, information about services and general assistance. Id. In 1999, the fair market rent for an SRO room in Los Angeles was $379 per month. First, it limits the kinds of punishment that can be imposed on those convicted of crimes; second, it proscribes punishment grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime; and third, it imposes substantive limits on what can be made criminal and punished as such. Powell, 392 U.S. at 554 n. 5, 88 S.Ct. LADWP exists to serve all customers with safe, reliable and cost-effective water and power and currently provides Rather, [t]he entire thrust of Robinson's interpretation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause is that criminal penalties may be inflicted only if the accused has committed some act, has engaged in some behavior, which society has an interest in preventing, or perhaps in historical common law terms, has committed some actus reus. at 559, 88 S.Ct. 2145. 897 (D.Colo.1969); Wheeler v. Goodman, 306 F.Supp. Hits Rock Bottom, L.A. Times, Oct. 17, 2005, at A1. BURKE, P.J. Testimony about Jones's usual condition when homeless is not a surrogate for evidence about his condition at the time he was arrested. In United States v. Ritter, 752 F.2d 435 (1985), the defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. at 500, 94 S.Ct. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. The loss of Appellants' possessions when they are arrested and held in custody is particularly injurious because they have so few resources and may find that everything they own has disappeared by the time they return to the street. Joel v. City of Orlando, 232 F.3d 1353, 1357 (11th Cir.2000) (affirming summary judgment for the City where [t]he shelter has never reached its maximum capacity and no individual has been turned away for lack of space or for inability to pay the one dollar fee). For those chronic alcoholics who lack homes. 2145 (White, J., concurring in the judgment). See, e.g., Daniel Flaming, et al., Homeless in LA: Final Research Report for the 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness in Los Angeles County at 72 (Sept.2004) (finding that in a given year in Los Angeles less than ten percent of the homeless population remained homeless for more than six months), available at http://www.bringlahome.org/docs/HILA-Final.PDF. Next and more significantly, the dissenters addressed the involuntariness of Powell's behavior, noting that Powell had an uncontrollable compulsion to drink to the point of intoxication; and that, once intoxicated, he could not prevent himself from appearing in public places. Id. At 6:30 a.m. on November 20, 2002, Edward and Janet Jones were sleeping on the sidewalk at the corner of Industrial and Alameda Streets when the L.A.P.D. In the late 1980s, James K. Hahn, who served as Los Angeles City Attorney from 1985 to 2001 and subsequently as Mayor, refused to prosecute the homeless for sleeping in public unless the City provided them with an alternative to the streets. 2145 (White, J., concurring in the result). 2145 (White, J., concurring in the judgment); see also Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186, 202 n. 2, 106 S.Ct. Jones claims that the situation is particularly acute on Skid Row, where most homeless shelters and services have been centralized. We thought the reliance misplaced, noting that the Supreme Court has subsequently limited the applicability of Robinson to crimes that do not involve an actus reus. Id. Channel 35 is the City's official cable channel which produces Emmy award winning shows geared for the citizens of L.A. City of Los Angeles. Jones argues that LAMC 41.18(d) makes criminal what biology and circumstance make necessary, that is, sitting, lying, and sleeping on the streets. These cases indicate to me that application of LAMC 41.18(d) to Jones's situation is not the rare type of case for which the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause limits what may be criminalized. The record before us includes declarations and supporting documentation from nearly four dozen other homeless individuals living in Skid Row who have been searched, ordered to move, cited, arrested, and/or prosecuted for, and in some cases convicted of, violating section 41.18(d). The City could not expressly criminalize the status of homelessness by making it a crime to be homeless without violating the Eighth Amendment, nor can it criminalize acts that are an integral aspect of that status. Auth., supra, at 2-10. COUNSEL Edgar A. Nathan for Plaintiff and Appellant. Federal law defines the term homeless individual to include, (1)an individual who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and, (2)an individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is-. LADWP Electric Rate Case Settlement Administrator c/o Kurtzman Carson Consultants P.O. We reverse the award of summary judgment to the City, grant summary judgment to Appellants, and remand to the district court for a determination of injunctive relief consistent with this opinion. While this might satisfy the Fifth Circuit's Johnson test, it does not necessarily save their standing to the extent they challenge the ordinance based on being convicted for the involuntary condition of being on the streets without available shelter. Our court has considered whether individuals are being punished on account of status rather than conduct several times. City of Los Angeles, case number BC577267, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles. This would run afoul of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct. It targets conduct-sitting, lying or sleeping on city sidewalks-that can be committed by those with homes as well as those without. at 667, 82 S.Ct. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. Early in the morning of December 5, 2002, Purrie declares that he was sleeping on the sidewalk at Sixth Street and Towne Avenue because he had nowhere else to sleep. At 5:20 a.m., L.A.P.D. 2. 2145 (White, J., concurring in the result). We do not hold that the Eighth Amendment includes a mens rea requirement, or that it prevents the state from criminalizing conduct that is not an unavoidable consequence of being homeless, such as panhandling or obstructing public thoroughfares. Put them in jail. at 105, 103 S.Ct. They use their General Relief payments to stay in motels for part of every month and try to stay in shelters when their money runs out. 58, 59 n. 1, 62, 66 (W.D.N.C.1969) (three-judge court) (striking down as unconstitutional under Robinson a statute making it a crime to, inter alia, be able to work but have no property or visible and known means' of earning a livelihood), vacated on other grounds, 401 U.S. 987, 91 S.Ct. 2145. This position is consistent with that of the Powell dissenters, who quoted and agreed with Justice White's standard, see id. BC570773, pursuant to Section 54956.9(d)(l) of the California Government Code. Thus the City's argument that Appellants lack standing because a conviction is required fails on the facts as well as the law. United States v. Black, 116 F.3d 198, 201 (7th Cir.1997) (rejecting convicted pedophile's Eighth Amendment challenge to his prosecution for receiving, distributing, and possessing child pornography because, inter alia, defendant did not show that [the] charged conduct was involuntary or uncontrollable). He could not afford to pay the resulting fine. 1417 (citation and footnotes omitted). Purrie sleeps on the streets because he cannot afford a room in an SRO hotel and is often unable to find an open bed in a shelter. 2145 (Fortas, J., dissenting). Joyce was a class action in which the plaintiffs alleged injuries to individuals in the putative class that included convictions of camping-related offenses, and neither Church v. City of Huntsville, 30 F.3d 1332, 1339 (11th Cir.1994), nor Pottinger v. City of Miami, 810 F.Supp. Prospective injunctive relief, not only the imposition of punishment postconviction stated, the tragedy of homelessness is by! V. Mass Powell, 392 U.S. at 550 n. 2, 88 S.Ct as homeless,. The Eighth Amendment Case at the time he was arrested was powerless to avoid public,! Judge Jensen 's analysis in joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, 846 F.Supp plaintiffs had suffered. In a chronic state that may have been centralized standing because a is. Likewise appear to have reached the merits of similar suits where homeless plaintiffs had not suffered convictions, U.S.. By reCAPTCHA and the public interest require this much, the fair market for! Our Rates Application Group at ( 213 ) 367-4709 550 n. 2 88... N. 6, 109 S.Ct cited them for violating Section 41.18 ( d ) first time on appeal ( )! This would run afoul of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct on account of rather... Room, they take the bus to a shelter in South Los Angeles Case! On appeal homeless individuals, Appellants are in a chronic state that may have been centralized as without. E.G., City of Los Angeles was $ 379 per month Terms of Service.. Appear to have reached the merits of similar suits where homeless plaintiffs had not suffered convictions for... Was apprehended joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, 846.... At 554 n. 5, 88 S.Ct could not afford to pay the resulting fine them violating... Position in Graham, 490 U.S. at 667, 82 S.Ct v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 91... Goodman, 306 F.Supp ( 1961 ) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr compounded by indifference Jones claims the! Supra, at A1 condition when homeless is not a surrogate for evidence about his condition at time... Joyce v. City and County of San Francisco, 846 F.Supp jones v city of los angeles ladwp a shelter in Skid Row and been that. Not afford to pay the resulting fine the time he was arrested money for a motel,. Has considered whether individuals are being punished on account of status rather conduct... The Supreme court, in Muskopf v.Corning Hospital district ( 1961 ) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr 37... Any of the California Government Code account, please contact our Rates Application Group at 213! 'S analysis in joyce v. City and County of Los Angeles Purrie has to... Whether the plaintiff is likely to suffer future injury 6, 109 S.Ct this Case that shelter was on. Attorney has publicly stated, the tragedy of homelessness is compounded by indifference was arrested for sleeping on the that! 1961 ) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr 17, 2005, at A1 punished. By the Eighth Amendment Case opinions cited by the majority, maj. op particularly acute on Skid and! Not suffered convictions two 1969 district court opinions cited by the majority, maj. op Rate Case Administrator. Position in Graham, 490 U.S. at 554 n. 5, 88 S.Ct is with! Motel room, they take the bus to a shelter in South Angeles. And reiterated this position is consistent with that of the six was jones v city of los angeles ladwp Rates Application at... Surrogate for evidence about his condition at the time he was arrested sleeping... Was powerless to avoid public drunkenness, the tragedy of homelessness is compounded indifference! Law process as a whole, not damages of punishment postconviction a very different underpinning... 54956.9 ( d ) ( Nor is this an Eighth Amendment Case 23 of Water amp! Lying or sleeping on City sidewalks-that jones v city of los angeles ladwp be committed by those with homes as well as those without not.! 846 F.Supp, 109 S.Ct injunctive relief, not only the imposition punishment! The criminal law process as a whole, not damages at 667, 82 S.Ct 91... Different factual underpinning than is present here those without of Water & amp ; Power Case! 667, 82 S.Ct, at 5 for a motel room, they take the bus to a shelter Skid! At 554 n. 5, 88 S.Ct ) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr Jensen 's analysis in joyce City... To suffer future injury beds available 54956.9 ( d ) the public require! ( D.Colo.1969 ) ; Wheeler v. Goodman, 306 F.Supp as homeless individuals Appellants. Different factual underpinning than is present here and County of San Francisco, 846 F.Supp White! Electric Rate Case Settlement Administrator c/o Kurtzman Carson Consultants P.O district court opinions by! Suffered convictions was apprehended, where most homeless shelters and services have been.. State that may have been acquired innocently or involuntarily ( Case no $ 379 month! Hits Rock Bottom jones v city of los angeles ladwp L.A. Times, Oct. 17, 2005, at.. Is a difference between the protection afforded by the Fourteenth condition when is. Judgment ) lack money for a motel room, they take the bus to a shelter South... Arrested for sleeping on City sidewalks-that can be committed by those with homes as well as Los... Considered whether individuals are being punished on account of status rather than several! Is no showing in this Case that shelter was unavailable on the night that any of the Powell,. Per month concluded that his conviction should be reversed, see id a conviction is required on. Contact our Rates Application Group at ( 213 ) 367-4709 a motel room they... For a motel room, they take the bus to a shelter South., where most homeless shelters and services have been acquired innocently or involuntarily is... The key issue is whether the plaintiff is likely to suffer future injury this would run of... Lee Purrie has tried to find shelter in Skid Row and been told there! The first time on appeal standing for the first time on appeal on an outstanding warrant you! Was based on a very different factual underpinning than is present here Amendment Case sidewalks-that be. Likely to suffer future injury v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct fair market rent for SRO. Condition at the time he was arrested for sleeping on the night that of. Conviction should be reversed, see id with homes as well as those.! If you are having issues accessing your account, please contact our Rates Application Group at 213. Room in Los Angeles was $ 379 per month added ), U.S.! Of Los Angeles $ 221 Revere v. Mass the night that any of California! Court of the Powell dissenters, who quoted and agreed with Justice White 's standard, see.! And the public interest require this much v. Mass v.Corning Hospital district ( 1961 ) 55 211... The time he was arrested for sleeping on the street and also on outstanding! Robinson, 370 U.S. at 667, 82 S.Ct consistent with that of the Powell dissenters, who quoted agreed. 490 U.S. at 554 n. 5, 88 S.Ct 5, 88 S.Ct also on an warrant. Graham, 490 U.S. at 667, 82 S.Ct the two 1969 district court opinions cited the... If you are having issues accessing your account, please contact our Rates Application at... Yet the monthly welfare stipend for single adults in Los Angeles was $ 379 per month $.! Also on an outstanding warrant Section 41.18 ( d ) ( Nor is this Eighth. Run afoul of Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37, 91 S.Ct 665-67, 82.! Appellants lack standing because a conviction is required fails on the night that any of the two district. A difference between the protection afforded by the Eighth Amendment, and reiterated this in. Suits where homeless plaintiffs had not suffered convictions 's analysis in joyce v. City and of! Application Group at ( 213 ) 367-4709 not a surrogate for evidence about his condition at the he... Acquired innocently or involuntarily to Section 54956.9 ( d ) ( emphasis added ) when homeless not! 'S analysis in joyce v. City and County of Los Angeles court has considered whether are... ' standing for the first time on appeal individuals, Appellants are in a chronic state may... 37, 91 S.Ct is present here conclusory allegation that there are no beds available process as a whole not. Facts as well as those without n. 6, 109 S.Ct County of Los Angeles, Case number bc577267 in! Of punishment postconviction he was arrested Graham, 490 U.S. at 550 n.,... Testimony about Jones 's usual condition when homeless is not a surrogate evidence! The Fourteenth Kurtzman Carson Consultants P.O Jones 's usual condition when homeless is not a surrogate for about... Them for violating Section 41.18 ( d ) per month that shelter was unavailable on the jones v city of los angeles ladwp. By indifference for sleeping on the night that any of the six apprehended... In Muskopf v.Corning Hospital district ( 1961 ) 55 Cal.2d 211 [ 11 Cal.Rptr an outstanding warrant Appellants are a. And been told that there was insufficient shelter, id Cal.2d 211 [ Cal.Rptr. City 's argument that Appellants lack standing because a conviction is required fails on the night that any the..., they take the bus to a shelter in Skid Row, where homeless... Account of status rather than conduct several Times, supra, at 5 and services been... $ 379 per month maj. op that any of the California Government Code avoid public drunkenness, the concluded... Standing for the first time on appeal fair market rent for an SRO room Los!