An Arlington County Circuit Court judge on Tuesday tossed out indictments accusing registered sex offender Richard Cox of exposing himself in school locker rooms, ruling that the criminal statute at the heart of the case is unconstitutional. The move halts Arlington’s prosecution for now and kicks the legal fight up to the appellate courts while prosecutors weigh their next steps.
Judge Finds Loitering Law ‘Void for Vagueness’
Judge Daniel T. Lopez concluded that the Virginia statute used to charge Cox criminalizes “loitering” within 100 feet of schools and child-day programs, yet never explains what “loitering” actually means or sets any concrete standards for when someone’s mere presence becomes a felony. In his memorandum opinion, Lopez wrote that the absence of clear definitions or objective behavioral benchmarks leaves both ordinary people and law enforcement guessing, a problem he said runs afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment. The full opinion is posted by WJLA.
Separate Child Pornography Conviction
In a different case, a jury recently found Cox guilty of two counts of possessing child pornography. Arlington prosecutors said the images were recovered after his December 2024 arrest at a county recreation center. Details on that verdict and his upcoming sentencing were outlined in a release from the Office of the Commonwealth’s Attorney for Arlington County, which the Arlington County Commonwealth’s Attorney has made public.
Locker Room Allegations And Local Fallout
Prosecutors alleged that in 2024 Cox went into women’s locker rooms at two high schools and at the Barcroft Sports & Fitness Center, at times claiming a female gender identity, and that he then exposed himself to women and girls. Local reporting has tracked both those accusations and the wider community fight over rules for gender-specific spaces, as covered by ARLnow.
Appeal Sends Case Up The Ladder
The Arlington Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office has appealed Judge Lopez’s ruling, and the Virginia Court of Appeals has agreed to hear the case. On appeal, the commonwealth will be represented by the state attorney general’s office, according to WJLA. While that plays out, activity in the underlying Arlington trial is essentially frozen.
How The Void-For-Vagueness Ruling Fits Virginia Law
Under the void-for-vagueness doctrine, criminal laws must spell out prohibited conduct clearly enough that ordinary people have fair notice and that police and prosecutors are not left with unchecked discretion. Virginia appellate rulings recognize that a statute without objective standards can be struck down on this basis; for a detailed discussion, see the Court of Appeals of Virginia.
“I want to see justice served,” the victim told WJLA as the case shifted to the appellate track. Separate matters involving Cox, including a 1988 sexual-assault charge in Fairfax County, are still pending. Arlington prosecutors say they intend to pursue the appeal and are looking to the higher court for direction on whether, and how, the loitering statute can be used in future cases.
