
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: TUESDAY, August 29, 1995                   TAG: 9508290023
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: C-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: DANVILLE                                LENGTH: Medium

DANVILLE PUSHING FOR CURFEW LAW

Danville is pushing ahead with a curfew ordinance that could send parents to jail if their children stay out too late too often, a tactic that failed to pass a judicial test in Roanoke.

A civil rights advocate said Monday that Danville's attempt to hold parents criminally responsible for curfew violations is misguided and likely to be held unconstitutional.

Roanoke Circuit Judge Diane Strickland ruled Thursday that a section of the city's curfew law that holds parents criminally responsible if their children repeatedly violate the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague.

Danville council member Ruby Archie said the potential criminal penalty against parents is necessary and the city's proposal will not change substantially because of the Roanoke ruling.

``If it's just a matter of semantics, I think we can work it out, but I think we've got to hold parents responsible,'' she said.

The ordinances in Roanoke and Danville are part of a trend in Virginia, where many localities are seeking to strengthen laws to keep children home late at night, according to Kent Willis, director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia.

Most of the 45 localities in Virginia with curfew ordinances allow prosecutors to seek civil fines for violations; but Roanoke, and now Danville, decided to take the penalties a step farther, Willis said.

Roanoke's curfew and Danville's proposed curfew hold parents criminally liable if their children repeatedly break the law because of ``insufficient control.''

Strickland ruled that Roanoke's ordinance did not explain the term, so parents could not figure out how to comply.

The Danville City Council may vote on its curfew ordinance, which would require kids under 18 to be off the streets by 11 on weeknights and midnight on weekends, on Sept. 5.

Mayor F. Seward Anderson said council members who support the ordinance may need to spend some time thinking about what constitutes proper control.

Steve Pershing, the ACLU's legal director in Richmond, said the council should solve any vagueness problems before enacting a curfew.

``It's especially dangerous when we start to hold someone liable for another person's crime,'' Pershing said. ``There's nothing to define what sufficient control is.''

Willis said he can conceive of no definition that would pass a constitutional test.

``Parents do not always know where children are,'' Willis said. ``You cannot hold someone criminally responsible for actions of others if they don't know about them.''

by CNB