Pennsylvania Supreme Court Rules PennDOT can use ARD as a prior DUI for License Suspension Purposes
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled recently on July 22, 2025, that PennDOT could use the ARD program against drivers who utilized it for purposes of drunk driving diversion.
This case, Ferguson v. PennDot is different from Commonwealth v. Shifflettmatter where the same Court indicated that lower Courts could not use ARD against a defendant for sentencing enhancement purposes in criminal Courts.
The Ferguson and Shifflet decisions are very different. The Commonwealth v. Shifflett case focused in on Due Process and the Ferguson v. Penndot case focused on the administrative police powers of an agency within the Commonwealth-PennDOT. Shifflett was a decision that affects criminal cases, while Ferguson is a decision that affects civil cases—specifically driver license suspension appeals
In Ferguson, the Court found that PennDOT could administratively suspend a person’s driver’s license without a Due Process violation as driving within the Commonwealth is a privilege and not a constitutional right. In Shifflett however, the same Court found that using ARD as a prior conviction is unlawful as ARD was not evidence that a Judge or jury found the person guilty beyond reasonable doubt but only that a person accepted diversion in lieu of Trial. In this situation, there is a Due Process violation.
What is a Due Process Violation?
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects individual rights from interference by the states. The Fourteenth Amendment prohibits the states from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” This means that a State can only deprive a person of a right according to law applied by a Court. There are 3 types of Due Process claims: (1) “procedural due process;” (2) the individual rights listed in the Bill of Rights, “incorporated” against the states; and (3) “substantive due process.”
What it means for ARD in Pennsylvania
These 2 cases are very important as the ARD program is one of the most common diversion programs in the Commonwealth. While Pennsylvania does have a drunk driving diversion program, New Jersey does not. A DWI in New Jersey however is not considered a criminal offense but a traffic offense if the incident does not result in any type of injury or death. In Pennsylvania, however, drunk driving is considered a misdemeanor and in some cases a felony offense for repeat offenders.
The ARD program prevents a person from not only incurring a criminal conviction but also gives them the opportunity to have their record expunged. It is important to remember however, even if a person receives a conviction as a result of DUI in Pennsylvania, they are almost immediately eligible for an interlock limited license which would allow them to drive immediately in most cases.
Ignition Interlock
The ignition interlock program in Pennsylvania is optional whereas in New Jersey if you are convicted of DWI, you must install the interlock device, or your mandatory license suspension will never begin. This also applies to out of State drivers. New Jersey will not restore a person’s driving privileges within the State and out of State drivers that do not install the interlock system will in many cases have their home State take action against them when they need to renew their driver’s license in that State.
For more information regarding Ferguson or Shifflettdecisions please contact our office.
Contact Our Criminal Defense Lawyers in Pennsylvania & New Jersey
Please click here to contact our criminal defense lawyers. We offer free case reviews and serve the following areas in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Atlantic City, Camden, Cherry Hill, Chester, Conshohocken, Doylestown, Media, Norristown, Philadelphia, Pottstown, Salem, Upper Darby, Upper Merion, Upper Providence, Vineland & Woodbury areas.
