This is a case that involves whether ARD violation occurred with multiple DUI's. The case is Whalen v. DOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 613 Pa. 64 (Pa. 2011). It is of vital importance to any Chester County DUI lawyer.
The driver was arrested for DUI in Florida, and he was convicted. Nine years later, he was arrested for DUI in Pennsylvania and charged with violating 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802(c). The trial court admitted the driver into an accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD) program under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3807 upon determining that his Florida DUI conviction did not present a bar thereto. The driver successfully completed the program. As a condition for restoration of his suspended operating privileges, which was a condition of the ARD program, the DOT directed the driver to install an II system on his vehicles under § 3805. On appeal, the trial court determined that the II requirement did not apply because the driver was not "convicted" of "violating" any DUI provision pursuant to the ARD resolution. That decision was affirmed, and upon further review, the court disagreed. It was clear that the Florida DUI was a "prior offense" for purposes of § 3805. Further, acceptance into the ARD program constituted a violation of § 3802 for purposes of § 3805. Accordingly, the driver was subject to the II requirement.
Additional commentary included, that although accelerated rehabilitative disposition (ARD) is legally distinct from a conviction, the General Assembly has chosen to equate ARD with a conviction under a variety of circumstances. For example, ARD may be statutorily construed as a conviction for purposes of computing sentences on subsequent convictions.
The court found that based strictly on the plain text of 75 Pa.C.S. § 3805, the ignition interlock requirement is applicable when a person "violates" 75 Pa.C.S. § 3802, and also, within the preceding 10 years, had a "prior offense," i.e., a prior conviction or prior acceptance of accelerated rehabilitative disposition for an offense under § 3802 or similar provision.