Email Us for a Consultation

    You may also fill out the form below and we will contact you at your convenience

    Fields marked with * are required.

    The use of the this form does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form unless requested to do so by an attorney.

    New decision on calculation of DUI offenses has unexpected consequences

    On May 30, 2025, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, in Commonwealth v. Shifflett, ruled that a defendant’s prior acceptance into the ARD (Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition) program can no longer be considered a “prior offense” for the purpose of enhancing penalties in future DUI cases.

    In determining that using ARD as a prior offense is unconstitutional, the High court invalidated the language in § 3806 that is shown in bold font below:

    (a) General rule. Except as set forth in subsection (b), the term “prior offense” as used in this chapter shall mean any conviction for which judgment of sentence has been imposed, adjudication of delinquency, juvenile consent decree, acceptance of Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition or other form of preliminary disposition before the sentencing on the present violation for any of the following:

    In the article linked below, Attorneys David Shrager and Lyle Dresbold discuss both the beneficial effects of this ruling and the potential downsides, particularly how it may influence whether and how county district attorneys continue to offer ARD in DUI cases going forward.

    VIEW FULL ARTICLE IN PDF FORM HERE
    SOURCE: LAWYERS JOURNAL. VOL. 27 NO. 14 • JULY 11, 2025. ALLEGHENY COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION.