
                         THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
                 Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, June 10, 1994                    TAG: 9406100008 
SECTION: FRONT                     PAGE: A18    EDITION: FINAL  
SOURCE: Medium 
DATELINE: 940610                                 LENGTH:

BREAK FOR BAD DRIVERS\

{LEAD} Commonwealth's attorneys and courts across Virginia are in a tizzy because the Court of Appeals ruled that the Department of Motor Vehicles provides inadequate information on the driving records of people facing possible declaration as habitual offenders. That's gross overreaction to a situation that generally is remedied by obtaining information that is readily available to the prosecutors.

Yet a judge dismissed a habitual-offender case against a three-time drunken driver in Virginia Beach, and prosecutors in Portsmouth withdrew about 25 cases, at least temporarily.

{REST} While the hand-wringing continues in local prosecutors' offices, at the state attorney general's office and DMV, prosecution of some of Virginia's worst drivers is at a standstill. Habitual-offender status may be imposed only after a motorist has been convicted of three major driving offenses, such as driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or 12 minor offenses within 10 years.

The halt in prosecution and DMV's notification to localities of drivers eligible for possible habitual-offender status came when the Court of Appeals ruled that driving records used in all habitual-offender cases are invalid because they do not include all information stipulated by state law. The DMV, which is convinced that it was complying fully with the law, says it is trying to determine what changes, if any, it must make to include detailed information on transcripts or abstracts sent to prosecutors.

The attorney general's office has not determined whether to appeal the ruling by a three-court panel to the full Court of Appeals or the Virginia Supreme Court.

The ruling says offense dates and defendants' pleas are required at habitual-offender hearings. However, some DMV records predate the plea requirement, a DMV spokesperson said.

Habitual-offender status is affixed in a civil procedure. DMV provides information to commonwealth's attorneys, who ask judges to declare the offending motorists habitual offenders. Those so labeled - last year, 4,935 Virginia motorists were declared habitual offenders - lose their licenses for up to 10 years and face criminal prosecution if they drive.

During the civil procedure, motorists are asked if information contained in the DMV summaries is correct. If they say it is not, the burden of proof is on them, and commonwealth's attorneys can simply ask for a delay in the hearing to give the driver time to obtain documentation or to get it themselves.

The same procedure should be used in light of the Court of Appeals ruling.

It may be a great - and hopefully temporary - inconvenience for the prosecutors to dig up the details that the Court of Appeals says is demanded by habitual-offender law, but the information is not so difficult to obtain that prosecutors should just throw up their hands. It's too important to other drivers that repeat violators be taken off the road. Norfolk alone has about 1,000 habitual-offender cases a year.

In this era of computerized information, bad drivers must not be spared prosecution just because DMV is not feeding prosecutors the right information. Or, for that matter, because it isn't providing information that wasn't required when some motorists were convicted.

The sooner this matter is cleared up, the safer Virginia roads will be. by CNB