BETHLEHEM, Pa. — An overhaul of Pennsylvania’s DUI sentencing structure is one step away from reaching the governor’s desk.
It comes after the state Senate last week approved amendments to House Bill 1615 and sent the legislation back to the House for concurrence.
The move signals the final phase of a fast-moving effort to rewrite how repeat DUI offenses are handled in the wake of a landmark court ruling in the spring that upended long-standing sentencing practices.
The legislative amendments are widely understood as the General Assembly’s response to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s Commonwealth vs. Shifflett decision, which held that Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition, or ARD, could no longer be considered a prior offense in DUI sentencing.
In summary, the court decided that using the pre-trial diversionary program to enhance future penalties for DUI violated defendants’ constitutional rights.
The ruling marked a major shift in how DUI cases can be prosecuted, with the court ruling that if a driver hasn’t been previously convicted, the state can’t punish them as if they were.
What HB1615 would do
Amendments to HB1615 would make significant changes to the state's DUI laws, most notably by creating a new crime — DUI following diversion — that allows prosecutors to treat a DUI committed within 10 years of a prior diversion program, such as ARD, as a repeat offense.
With the changes, a DUI would be sentenced the same as a second-offense DUI. Additional offenses could escalate penalties to higher-degree misdemeanors or felony charges, restoring the enhanced sentencing structure prosecutors have relied on for years.
The amended legislation also requires PennDOT and county courts to keep ARD acceptance and completion records for 12 years, adjusts ignition-interlock eligibility rules, rewrites grading and mandatory minimums to align with the new offense, and strengthens sentencing in DUI-related vehicular homicide cases where the defendant previously completed a diversionary program.
Why lawmakers moved quickly
The ruling in May by the high court had sharply limited prosecutors’ ability to seek enhanced penalties against individuals who reoffend after completing a diversionary program.
In response, district attorneys across the commonwealth said their offices were re-evaluating how and when they offered ARD.
That included Lehigh County District Attorney Gavin Holihan, who told LehighValleyNews.com over the summer the decision led his office to re-evaluate how and when it offers ARD, and that his office was specifically reviewing each case independently.
Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday, whose office supported the legislative fix, said the court’s decision stripped the system of an essential accountability tool.
“This bill remedies a state court’s ruling that essentially disregards a first DUI offense resulting in ARD when a second DUI conviction occurs,” Sunday said.
"While I am an advocate of second chances when appropriate, I have found in my career that many DUI offenders are at high risk to re-offend, so precautions must be in place to ensure accountability if they commit subsequent offenses.”
Sunday said the stakes of restoring meaningful sentencing for repeat impaired driving are clear.
“Every time someone makes the intentional decision to get behind the wheel intoxicated, they endanger every person they encounter on the roadway,” he said. “I have seen far too many tragedies caused by completely avoidable vehicle crashes rooted to DUI.”
“Every time someone makes the intentional decision to get behind the wheel intoxicated, they endanger every person they encounter on the roadway."Pennsylvania Attorney General Dave Sunday
While Sunday has framed the bill as a necessary public-safety measure, he emphasized that diversionary programs remain critical for appropriate offenders, but only when paired with strong consequences for those who reoffend.
“I will continue to advocate for ARD and other worthy diversion programs as positive resolutions to criminal charges for certain offenders,” he said. “But there is no such thing as a freebie when it comes to driving while intoxicated.”
What Senate concurrence means
Because the Senate amended the bill, HB1615 must return to the House for a concurrence vote, a procedural step required whenever the second chamber modifies legislation that originated in the first.
If the House votes to concur, the bill is considered finally passed and will be sent to Gov. Josh Shapiro for signature or veto.
If the chamber rejects the amendments, the measure would move to a conference committee composed of members from both chambers to negotiate a compromise, though such a step appears unlikely given the bill’s broad bipartisan support.
The final passage in the House was 203-0.
What happens next
House leadership has not yet announced when the concurrence vote will take place, but lawmakers and prosecutors expect it to move quickly.
If the House concurs and the governor signs the bill, the updated DUI reforms would take effect 30 days later, reshaping how Pennsylvania handles repeat impaired-driving cases and closing the sentencing gap created by the Shifflett decision.
Until then, prosecutors across the state continue operating under a narrower framework that limits their ability to seek enhanced penalties for drivers who reoffend after completing diversion programs.
