Act 58 Signed: How New Law Restores ARD for PA DUI Cases

For months, the legal landscape surrounding Driving Under the Influence (DUI) cases in Pennsylvania has been in a state of flux. Following a landmark Supreme Court decision that upended how prior offenses were calculated, many first-time offenders found themselves in legal limbo, unable to access the rehabilitative programs that had been a staple of the Commonwealth’s justice system for decades.

That period of uncertainty came to an end on December 22, 2025, when Governor Josh Shapiro signed Act 58 of 2025 into law. This legislation serves as a direct legislative fix to the issues raised by the courts, explicitly restoring the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) program for DUI cases.

For Pennsylvanians, this new law represents a critical return to stability. It balances the need for rehabilitation for first-time mistakes with strict accountability for repeat offenders. However, the reinstatement of ARD comes with new statutory strictures that every driver and every legal professional must understand.

The Legacy of Commonwealth v. Shifflett

To understand why Act 58 was necessary, one must look at the legal disruption caused by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Shifflett.

Historically, if a person accepted ARD for a first DUI and was later arrested for a second DUI, the law treated the ARD as a “prior offense,” triggering mandatory minimum sentences for the second charge. However, in Shifflett, the Supreme Court ruled that ARD is not a conviction because it involves no finding of guilt by a judge or jury. Using ARD acceptance to trigger mandatory minimum sentencing enhancements violated the Sixth Amendment principles articulated in Alleyne and Apprendi because the prior disposition had not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt

The ruling created a paradox. While it protected constitutional rights, it also removed the prosecutorial incentive to offer ARD. Fearing that a defendant could take ARD, re-offend, and then legally be treated as a first-time offender again, many District Attorney’s offices across Pennsylvania paused ARD offers entirely. First-time offenders who traditionally would have received a second chance were suddenly facing full prosecution, criminal convictions, and permanent records.

Jesse Congo is an experienced Criminal & DUI Defense Attorney at Kitay Law Offices with a long track record of success. He comments that Shifflet caused significant negative consequences that have affected client outcomes.

“This ruling disrupted the balance between protecting constitutional rights and maintaining effective prosecutorial tools,” said Attorney Jesse Congo. “While ARD was designed to give first-time offenders a second chance, the Shifflet decision unintentionally discouraged its use, leaving many without access to this valuable opportunity for rehabilitation.”

Restoring the ARD Framework

Act 58 of 2025 expressly states its intent “to restore procedures by which defendants… may secure rehabilitative treatment and a clean record”, while ensuring repeat offenders face appropriate statutory consequences.

The legislation amends both Title 42 and Title 75, reestablishing ARD as an available diversionary option for eligible DUI defendants. It codifies mandatory program components.

By signing this legislation, the Commonwealth has effectively pressed “play” on a system that had been paused, allowing prosecutors to once again offer diversionary programs without fear of losing leverage over repeat offenders.

Key Requirements for Eligibility

Under Act 58, ARD is not a guaranteed right; it is a privilege that comes with strict statutory requirements. The new law mandates a standardized set of conditions that participants must complete to successfully earn a dismissal of charges.

A defendant accepted into the program under the new framework must comply with the following:

Mandatory Safety School and Evaluation

Participants must attend and successfully complete an alcohol highway safety school. Additionally, prior to or during the program, defendants must undergo a full drug and alcohol evaluation. This evaluation determines if the individual requires further treatment or counseling to address underlying substance abuse issues.

Court Supervision

The Act standardizes the period of supervision. Defendants generally remain subject to court supervision (probation) for a period ranging from six to 12 months. This ensures that the Commonwealth can monitor the individual’s conduct for a significant period before the charges are dismissed.

Financial Obligations

Restitution remains a priority. Defendants must pay restitution to any person who suffered a financial loss due to the offender’s actions. Additionally, the law mandates the payment of reasonable municipal costs and specific fees to the Emergency Medical Services Operating Fund.

New Penalty Structures and the 10-Year Lookback

Perhaps the most significant aspect of Act 58 is how it addresses the constitutional defect identified in Shifflett. Rather than treating ARD as a “prior offense” under § 3806, the legislature removed ARD from that definition and created a new statutory framework under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(h).

Under § 3802(h), a person who commits a DUI within 10 years after completing ARD commits a distinct statutory offense—commonly referred to as “DUI following diversion.” The grading and penalties for that offense are enhanced relative to a first-time DUI.

By structuring the enhancement as a separate substantive offense, rather than a sentencing factor triggering mandatory minimums, Act 58 was designed to satisfy the constitutional concerns raised in Shifflett and the Alleyne line of cases.

Additionally, before a defendant may enter ARD, the court must conduct an on-the-record colloquy ensuring that acceptance is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. This procedural safeguard reinforces the constitutionality of the framework.

Record Retention and Expungement

Act 58 also clarifies the murky waters of record keeping. Previously, the expungement process for ARD could vary by county and circumstance. The new law establishes a more uniform policy regarding record retention.

Under the new statute, while a successful ARD completion leads to the dismissal of charges, the record is not immediately vaporized. The law provides for a 12-year record retention period. During this time, the record is expunged from public view—meaning it will not appear on background checks for employment or housing—but it is retained by the Commonwealth for limited prosecutorial use.

This retention allows police and prosecutors to verify eligibility. If a person is arrested for a DUI five years after completing ARD, the system will flag the prior disposition, ensuring they are ineligible for a “second” ARD and are properly charged as a second offender.

Strategic Implications for Defendants

The passage of Act 58 has stabilized the DUI process, but it has also made the decision to accept ARD more legally complex. It is no longer a simple administrative process; it is a decision with decade-long implications.

Attorney Jesse Congo emphasizes that while the return of ARD is a victory for defendants, it requires careful legal navigation.

“Act 58 restores a vital balance to our justice system,” says Attorney Jesse Congo. “It allows us to secure rehabilitative outcomes for clients who made a mistake, ensuring a single bad night doesn’t ruin a career. However, the new statutory language means the ‘contract’ a defendant signs when accepting ARD is more binding than ever regarding future consequences.”

With District Attorneys adjusting their policies to align with the new statute, the criteria for who gets an ARD offer may shift. Prosecutors retain discretion, and factors such as a high Blood Alcohol Content (BAC), accident involvement, or interactions with law enforcement can still disqualify a candidate.

“Many people assume ARD is automatic for a first offense, but under Act 58, prosecutors still hold the keys,” Attorney Congo cautions. “Having a lawyer who understands the specific changes in the Vehicle Code is essential. We aren’t just fighting for acceptance into the program; we are ensuring the client fully understands the long-term rights they are waiving to get there.”

Take the Next Step

The enactment of Act 58 of 2025 marks the end of the post-Shifflett confusion and the beginning of a new era for Pennsylvania DUI law. By explicitly authorizing ARD while satisfying constitutional requirements for repeat offender enhancements, the legislature has preserved a pathway for rehabilitation.

For first-time offenders, this is welcome news: the opportunity to keep a clean record is once again firmly established in the law. However, the heightened requirements and strict lookback periods mean that legal guidance is more important than ever.

If you or a loved one are facing DUI charges, do not assume you will automatically qualify for these new provisions. The DUI attorneys at Kitay Law Offices are deeply familiar with Act 58 and are ready to help you navigate this new legal landscape to protect your future. Contact Kitay Law Offices today for a free consultation on your case.