According to two recent ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the way that Driving Under Influence (DUI) cases are handled, is about to change. Even with this, there are many people such as prosecutors, law officials and attorneys who have been arguing about this. These two rulings impact the role of the state’s Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) program. This has also influenced changes in certain counties, in terms of how they deal with DUI cases.
ARD No Longer Counts as a Prior Offense in Criminal Sentencing
The high court held in Commonwealth v. Shifflett, decided on May 30, that ARD is no longer a prior offence for DUI sentencing.
Since ARD does not require a trial, using it to increase future sentences is unconstitutional.
According to Chief Justice Debra Todd, if a defendant is not found guilty, they cannot be considered as a repeat offender in future criminal cases. After completing ARD, a person will now be sentenced as a first-time offender should they be charged again.
But PennDOT Still Uses ARD for Administrative Penalties
A few weeks later, in Ferguson v. PennDOT, the high court issued another ruling. This ruling favoured the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and the court noted that PennDOT can still use ARD participation to impose administrative consequences and these include the suspension of driver’s license or ignition interlock requirements.
Therefore, although ARD no longer counts towards harsher criminal penalties, it still results in administrative actions from PennDOT. This difference is currently affecting the choices made by prosecutors in places like Lehigh County.
Lehigh County Tightens ARD Eligibility
Lehigh County District Attorney Gavin Holihan said the recent Shifflett ruling has pushed his office to take a closer look at when and how the ARD program is offered. Even though some first-time DUI offenders can still qualify, now, every case goes through a stricter review process before a decision is made:
Holihan explained the updated criteria his team is following:
- Drug-related DUIs involving substances other than marijuana are no longer eligible.
- High blood alcohol levels will be considered a sign of greater danger to the public and may count against eligibility.
- Reckless driving — such as speeding or other risky behaviour
- Refusing a blood-alcohol test means the person must first meet extra requirements, like completing community service or attending anger management.
- Uncooperative conduct during the arrest, including resisting officers or disrupting the process.
- Showing up to court intoxicated is treated as a major red flag and could lead to additional conditions before ARD is considered.
From Diversion to Conviction
Holihan mentioned that fewer first-time DUI defendants will now qualify for ARD. All those who are denied entry, will face criminal prosecution and this may include time in jail for certain cases.
“People who previously would have faced mandatory jail time for a second DUI may now avoid it because their ARD participation isn’t counted,” he said. “That could encourage risky behaviour on the road.”
A defence Attorney’s Mixed Feelings
Criminal defence lawyer David Ritter of Kitay Law Offices has seen both sides of the issue professionally and personally.
“I’ve been hit by drunk drivers twice in my life in Lehigh County,” Ritter said. “We avoided a fatal accident by about an eighth of a second,” he said.
Ritter admitted that while the Shifflett ruling will benefit his clients, it’s not something that he is happy about.
More DUI Trials on the Horizon?
There needs to be the possibility of a more severe punishment for those people who are repeat offenders, as some defendants would likely challenges their charges in court.
As the legal departments of Pennsylvania adjust to these changes, it is still difficult to balance between rehabilitation and public safety.