Curfew Laws Jail the Innocent and the Guilty : Courts: A Canoga Park man was arrested when he ventured outside when his window was broken. Some say civil liberties are among the riot casualties.

The way his public defender tells it, a 40-year-old African-American in Canoga Park was awakened about 3 a.m. Saturday by the sound of a window breaking in his apartment.

When he went outside to investigate, he was promptly arrested by police for violating the dusk-to-dawn curfew imposed in the wake of last week’s riots.

On Tuesday, that man, as well as hundreds of other people who had been sitting in jail for days after being arrested in the San Fernando Valley for violating curfew, pleaded no contest and was sentenced to 10 days in jail and one year probation.

It is a process that is causing increased frustration among members of the public defender’s office, who complain that the lengthy sentences are an indication that civil liberties have also become victims of the riots.

Unable to get charges dropped, the public defenders are advising those in custody that if they can’t post the $8,000 bail, they should plead no contest and immediately start serving their 10 days in jail rather than spend another 20 to 30 days in jail to await a trial.

“There is no public interest being served” in such sentences, said Deputy Public Defender David H. Cho, who represented the Canoga Park man during sentencing in Van Nuys Municipal Court. Cho could not immediately recall the man’s name because of the numerous cases he has handled in the past few days.

The 10-day sentences are “outrageous for having done nothing but being out after dark,” said Bill Weiss, head of the San Fernando public defender’s office.

Weiss said the post-riot atmosphere is causing people “even with good intentions to suspend the civil liberties of people. Everyone is trying to make political hay out of this . . . and it is the people who are suffering.”

Supervising Judge Juelann K. Cathey of the San Fernando Municipal Court agreed that, generally, curfew violators should not receive the same punishment as people who committed criminal acts of violence or property damage, but said the state of emergency in this case requires a sentence harsher than normal.

“The potential for danger required that,” Cathey said. “Why these people had to contribute to that is beyond me.”

The city attorney’s office had been asking over the weekend for 90-day sentences for curfew violators. On Monday, city attorneys dropped it to 30 days, but opposed the 10-day sentences that were imposed, arguing that defendants would be back on the streets while police were still trying to maintain order.

Deputy public defenders in Van Nuys earlier this week repeatedly argued in vain that charges should be dropped because people arrested for curfew violations did not--as the curfew law requires--”imperil the lives or property of other inhabitants of this city, or . . . prevent, hinder or delay the defense or protection thereof.”

“Motion denied,” was the response each time from Commissioners John Ladner and Patricia G. Schwartz in Van Nuys, who said the mere fact that police had to take time to arrest curfew violators hindered or delayed their ability to protect the city.

“I’m feeling so helpless, so defenseless,” said Deputy Public Defender David D. Marsh in Van Nuys. “We end up being relegated to processing them through a court system that has little respect for their rights under these circumstances.”

Weiss said that curfew violators should be treated in sentencing similarly to people arrested for public drunkenness: “Get them off the street and let them go in the morning. If they are going to be processed through the judicial system, then they should be sentenced to time already served.”

Deputy public defenders in Van Nuys said that most of the people arrested for violating curfew were minorities from the northeast Valley. They said most did not have criminal records, and most were arrested within blocks of their homes.

Weiss said that on Friday night he took a walk along Ventura Boulevard near his home in Sherman Oaks. He said other people were on the street, but he did not see anyone arrested although officers were patrolling the street.

Police have defended arresting curfew violators primarily in minority areas by saying that’s “where the riot occurred. . . . The riot didn’t occur in Porter Ranch.”

Police Capt. Patrick McKinley, assistant director of operations for the Valley, said officers did not arrest anyone for violating the curfew “if they had a legitimate purpose” for being out.

Unlike in Los Angeles, the 15 people who were arrested for violating curfew in the city of San Fernando were held only overnight, according to Police Lt. Rico Castro.

Castro said nearly all were released in the morning without having to post any bail after being issued citations and told to appear in court in 30 days. They, too, however, are likely to be sentenced to 10 days in jail if they plead guilty to the charge, Castro said.

Castro said violators were released because of a shortage of jail space at the San Fernando police station.

He also said that officers arrested only people who they believed might cause problems, which he described as those who were not near their homes or could not offer reasonable explanations for being outdoors.

MAIN STORY: A3