“It is clear from reading DOT’s Rule 1925(b) statement of errors that it failed to raise any challenge regarding its supposed consent to Kolva’s withdrawal from [Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition] or regarding federal anti-masking provisions. Accordingly, these issues are deemed waived and need not be addressed by this Court.”
How later courts described this case
- “It is clear from reading DOT’s Rule 1925(b) statement of errors that it failed to raise any challenge regarding its supposed consent to Kolva’s withdrawal from [Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition] or regarding federal anti-masking provisions. Accordingly, these issues are deemed waived and need not be addressed by this Court.”
- discussing an appellant who was accepted into an ARD program for a DUI “offense ”
- “It is clear from reading DOT’s Rule 1925(b
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DISSENTING OPINION BY
Judge PELLEGRINI.
Because Section 1603 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1603, provides that a licensee who accepts Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) is deemed convicted, making the licensee disqualified from driving a commercial motor vehicle or school vehicle for a period of one year under 75 Pa.C.S. § 1611, 1 I respectfully dissent.
The issue before us is whether once ARD is accepted, a licensee may later withdraw his acceptance into that pro *1254 gram, plead guilty to a lesser crime and avoid suspension of his license. Section 1603 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1603, defines a “conviction” as:
[T]he acceptance of Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition [ARD] or other preadjudication disposition for an offense or an unvacated finding of guilt or determination of violation of law or failure to comply with the law by an authorized administrative tribunal. The term does not include a conviction which has been overturned or for which an individual has been pardoned. (Emphasis added.)
As can be seen, unlike convictions or failure to comply with the law, the General Assembly did not qualify the acceptance of ARD. Acceptance results in a classification of “convicted” for license suspension purposes. By making acceptance the touchstone, our General Assembly also sought to avoid manipulation of the ARD program by allowing a licensee to withdraw from the program once the “heat was off’ and then plead guilty to a lesser offense that did not require his or her license to be suspended.
Absent a licensee establishing that he was misinformed of the terms of the program, once a licensee accepts ARD, even if the licensee later withdraws, he is still convicted as that term is defined by Section 1603 of the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1603.
Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
President Judge LEADBETTER and Judge COHN JUBELIRER join in this dissenting opinion.
. 75 Pa.C.S. § 1611(a) provides, in relevant part:
First violation of certain offenses. — Upon receipt of a report of conviction, the department shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed under this title, disqualify any person from driving a commercial motor vehicle or school vehicle for a period of one year for the first violation of: (1) section 3802 (relating to driving under influence of alcohol or controlled substance) or former section 3731, where the person was a commercial driver at the time the violation occurred.