Practice question
A sixteen-year-old violates a local juvenile-curfew ordinance. The ordinance imposes imprisonment on the child and directs that the child be recorded as in conflict with the law solely for that violation. Under current section 57-A, which approach is correct?
- Impose the ordinance’s imprisonment because local rules prevail over the Act
- Apply the protective handling and intervention framework without a penalty on the child, recording the child as at risk rather than in conflict with the law for that violation
- Require the child to choose between imprisonment and a humiliating public sign
- Treat every curfew violation as proof of discernment for a separate felony
- Impose death because curfew is a status offense
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2006/ra_9344_2006.html — RA 9344, Titles I, IV and VII, especially sections 6, 20, 57 and 60–61, read with RA 10630.
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2013/ra_10630_2013.html — sections 3, 6 and 11, amended age rule, intervention and IJISC provisions, qualified parental civil liability and local-ordinance protections.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.