Case Results

Out of State Resident Readmitted to Philadelphia DUI ARD Program After Initially Failing to Complete ARD Conditions

January 2017

A.C., an out-of-state resident who lived in Colorado, contacted us because of concerns with an old DUI ARD case in Philadelphia.  A.C. had been able to be initially admitted into Philadelphia's ARD program, also known as Accelerated Rehabilitative Diversion, for a prior first-offense DUI charge.  (A defendant generally has to be a first-time offender to be prospectively eligible for Accelerated Rehabilitative Diversion in Pennsylvania.)  Due to personal circumstances beyond his control, A.C. unfortunately failed to complete the conditions of the ARD program after being admitted to the program several years earlier.

In addition, a significant amount of time had passed between A.C.'s inability to complete the conditions of his ARD and the present day; despite A.C. now being in a better position to be able to attend to those concerns.  Another complicating factor was that in light of professional and personal goals that A.C. was now pursuing, there were legitimate concerns whether or not he would remain eligible for resolving his case through ARD because approximately seven years had passed without any follow up on his part.  There was no question that A.C. had failed to abide by the expectations of the ARD program - The question was, "Would the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office allow re-admission to ARD after failing to comply?"

Is the agreement of the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office necessary in allowing a defendant to be admitted (or re-admitted) to ARD?

The agreement of the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office is generally always required for Accelerated Rehabilitative Diversion admission (or re-admission when such extenuating circumstances arise).  Because of this important consideration, we explained the circumstances and concerns to A.C. and indicated that the best first steps to take would be to follow up with the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office and the Philadelphia Probation Department on his behalf. 

With the goal of getting A.C. back in the authorities' "good graces," we first contacted and spoke with a personal colleague who is a Chief at the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office to explain A.C.'s circumstances and hopes of still being able to resolve his DUI case through the Philadelphia ARD program as initially had been anticipated, and especially in light of his present education and employment goals.  We also spoke with a supervisor at the Philadelphia Probation Department. We suggested to both our colleague at the District Attorney's Office and the supervisor at the Probation Department that we could provide information and documentation that should help address any concerns regarding prospective re-admission to ARD and should provide a reasonable basis in allowing such reconsideration to take place.

Per our advice to A.C., we instructed him to obtain supporting documentation that would help with our request on his behalf.  Such documentation was intended to demonstrate A.C.'s positive steps forward in life over the past several years (despite not following through with his ARD conditions) and included employment documentation, work references, character references, and a detailed explanation as to what he was specifically doing with his life at present, and also what his future goals were and how a criminal conviction and criminal record would negatively impact those goals.

Based on the submitted documentation and information, the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office agreed to allow A.C. to complete his DUI case through the ARD program despite the prior issues with compliance.

Can a unsuccessful ARD case be "re-opened" to allow for potential successful completion of the ARD program?

Whether an unsuccessful ARD case will be "re-opened" will depend on the circumstances, but a defendant (and his or her attorney) will have to demonstrate that such a step is warranted; although not impossible, such a proposition will generally be difficult to accomplish.  Thankfully, such a result was able to be obtained for A.C. based on it being demonstrated that A.C. was deserving of a second chance. 

Because A.C.'s case had been administratively closed in light of his not following through with his court-ordered conditions of the ARD program, the Philadelphia Probation Department had to reopen his case after we were able to get the agreement of the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office in allowing such a step to take place. Once A.C.'s ARD case was reopened, the remaining conditions, including alcohol highway safety school had to be completed.  We were able to make arrangements with the Philadelphia Probation Department for A.C. to do so in Colorado in light of the fact that he lived out of state.  

Can a DUI case that is resolved through ARD be expunged?

After all of A.C.'s ARD conditions were satisfied and we were able to provide documentation of such to the Philadelphia Probation Department, the Philadelphia Probation Department successfully closed A.C.'s case.  The successful completion of A.C.'s ARD case allowed us to pursue an expungement in Philadelphia on his behalf for the DUI charge itself.  In doing so, A.C. was able to continue moving forward in life and to continue working towards his goals for both himself and his family.

Attorney to Help with ARD Issues in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

Whether your or your loved one's case involves a DUI charge, drug charge, or any other criminal offense in Philadelphia or out of county, the attorneys at LLF Law Firm haveJoseph D. Lento years of experience in helping clients successfully navigate and resolve difficult circumstances.  Contact them today to learn how they can help.

Practice area(s): Criminal Defense, DUI / DWI

Court: Philadelphia Municipal Court

Contact Us Today!

The LLF Law Firm Team has decades of experience successfully resolving clients' criminal charges in Philadelphia and the Pennsylvania counties. If you are having any uncertainties about what the future may hold for you or a loved one, contact the LLF Law Firm today! Our Criminal Defense Team will go above and beyond the needs of any client, and will fight until the final bell rings.

This website was created only for general information purposes. It is not intended to be construed as legal advice for any situation. Only a direct consultation with a licensed Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York attorney can provide you with formal legal counsel based on the unique details surrounding your situation. The pages on this website may contain links and contact information for third party organizations - the Lento Law Firm does not necessarily endorse these organizations nor the materials contained on their website. In Pennsylvania, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout Pennsylvania's 67 counties, including, but not limited to Philadelphia, Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Carbon, Chester, Dauphin, Delaware, Lancaster, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Schuylkill, and York County. In New Jersey, attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New Jersey's 21 counties: Atlantic, Bergen, Burlington, Camden, Cape May, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Salem, Somerset, Sussex, Union, and Warren County, In New York, Attorney Joseph D. Lento represents clients throughout New York's 62 counties. Outside of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, unless attorney Joseph D. Lento is admitted pro hac vice if needed, his assistance may not constitute legal advice or the practice of law. The decision to hire an attorney in Philadelphia, the Pennsylvania counties, New Jersey, New York, or nationwide should not be made solely on the strength of an advertisement. We invite you to contact the Lento Law Firm directly to inquire about our specific qualifications and experience. Communicating with the Lento Law Firm by email, phone, or fax does not create an attorney-client relationship. The Lento Law Firm will serve as your official legal counsel upon a formal agreement from both parties. Any information sent to the Lento Law Firm before an attorney-client relationship is made is done on a non-confidential basis.