Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368 (2026)

Speed timing devices.

✓ current as of May 2026

Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§ 3368. Speed timing devices.

(a) Speedometers authorized.--The rate of speed of any vehicle may be timed on any highway by a police officer using a motor vehicle equipped with a speedometer. In ascertaining the speed of a vehicle by the use of a speedometer, the speed shall be timed for a distance of not less than three-tenths of a mile.

(b) Testing of speedometers.--The department may appoint stations for testing speedometers and may prescribe regulations as to the manner in which the test shall be made. Speedometers shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of one year prior to the alleged violation and immediately upon change of tire size. A certificate from the station showing that the test was made, the date of the test and the degree of accuracy of the speedometer shall be competent and prima facie evidence of those facts in every proceeding in which a violation of this title is charged.

(c) Mechanical, electrical and electronic devices authorized.--

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, the rate of speed of any vehicle may be timed on any highway by a police officer using a mechanical or electrical speed timing device.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (3), electronic devices such as radio-microwave devices, commonly referred to as electronic speed meters or radar, may be used only as part of an automated speed enforcement system or by members of the Pennsylvania State Police.

(3) Electronic devices which calculate speed by measuring elapsed time between measured road surface points by using two sensors and devices which measure and calculate the average speed of a vehicle between any two points may be used by any police officer.

(4) No person may be convicted upon evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraphs (2) and (3) unless the speed recorded is six or more miles per hour in excess of the legal speed limit. Furthermore, no person may be convicted upon evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraph (3) in an area where the legal speed limit is less than 55 miles per hour if the speed recorded is less than ten miles per hour in excess of the legal speed limit. This paragraph shall not apply to evidence obtained through the use of devices authorized by paragraph (2) or (3) within a school zone or an active work zone.

(5) Light detection and ranging devices, commonly referred to as LIDAR, may be used only as part of an automated speed enforcement system or by members of the Pennsylvania State Police.

(d) Classification, approval and testing of mechanical, electrical and electronic devices.--The department may, by regulation, classify specific devices as being mechanical, electrical or electronic. All mechanical, electrical or electronic devices shall be of a type approved by the department, which shall appoint stations for calibrating and testing the devices and may prescribe regulations as to the manner in which calibrations and tests shall be made. The certification and calibration of electronic devices under subsection (c)(3) shall also include the certification and calibration of all equipment, timing strips and other devices which are actually used with the particular electronic device being certified and calibrated. Electronic devices commonly referred to as electronic speed meters or radar shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of one year prior to the alleged violation. Other devices shall have been tested for accuracy within a period of 60 days prior to the alleged violation. A certificate from the station showing that the calibration and test were made within the required period and that the device was accurate shall be competent and prima facie evidence of those facts in every proceeding in which a violation of this title is charged.

(e) Distance requirements for use of mechanical, electrical and electronic devices.--Mechanical, electrical or electronic devices may not be used to time the rate of speed of vehicles within 500 feet after a speed limit sign indicating a decrease of speed. This limitation on the use of speed timing devices shall not apply to speed limit signs indicating school zones, bridge and elevated structure speed limits, hazardous grade speed limits and work zone speed limits.

(f) LIDAR testing and calibration.--

(1) The department may, upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin, provide that LIDAR speed measuring devices and LIDAR systems shall be calibrated and tested using the testing procedures in department regulation.

(2) LIDAR speed measuring devices and LIDAR systems shall be calibrated and tested every 365 days at a minimum before being utilized by the Pennsylvania State Police or as part of an automated speed enforcement system.

(3) The certification that the LIDAR device and system, as applicable, have been tested and found to be accurate shall create a presumption that the requirements of this subsection have been fulfilled.

(4) As used in this subsection, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings given to them in this paragraph unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

"LIDAR." The technology of measuring target range using reflected light to determine target range and speed from the time-of-flight of laser pulses.

"LIDAR speed-measuring device." Speed-measuring equipment that determines target range and speed based on the time-of-flight of laser light pulses reflected off a target.

"LIDAR system." A LIDAR speed-measuring device that incorporates additional equipment that is used to gather, process and record images, as applicable, to be used as part of speed enforcement efforts.

(July 11, 1985, P.L.204, No.52, eff. 60 days; Mar. 27, 1986, P.L.71, No.24, eff. imd.; Dec. 23, 2002, P.L.1982, No.229, eff. 6 months; Nov. 26, 2008, P.L.1658, No.133, eff. 60 days; Oct. 19, 2018, P.L.563, No.86, eff. imd.)

2018 Amendment. Act 86 amended subsec. (c)(2) and added subsecs. (c)(5) and (f).

2008 Amendment. Act 133 amended subsecs. (b) and (d).

2002 Amendment. Act 229 amended subsec. (c)(4).

1986 Amendment. Act 24 amended subsecs. (c) and (d).

1985 Amendment. Act 52 amended subsec. (c) and added subsec. (e).

Cross References. Section 3368 is referred to in sections 3369, 3370, 3371 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 43 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Martin v. DOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 905 A.2d 438 (Pa. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Martin v. DOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 905 A.2d 438 (Pa. 2006). · cites it 6× “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(a). Here, Officer Sollenberger only clocked appellant's speed for 100 yards while still in Hampden Township.”

Commonwealth v. McCandless, 648 A.2d 309 (Pa. 1994). · cites it 6× “[4] 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368 provides, in pertinent part: (a) Speedometers authorized.”

Commonwealth v. DePasquale, 501 A.2d 626 (Pa. 1985). · cites it 6× “The erudite explication of the majority's conclusion that the ESP machine used in this case was an electric device within the meaning of section 3368(c) of the Motor Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(c), does not address the underlying issue in this appeal.”

Commonwealth v. Feczko, 10 A.3d 1285 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2010). “The Supreme Court held that there was no reasonable or articulable basis for the officer to suspect a violation of the Motor Vehicle Code because the officer had not paced the defendant for the required three-tenths of a mile under 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(a), and the officer’s…”

United States v. Warren Green, IV, 897 F.3d 173 (3rd Cir. 2018). “See 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368 (requirements for pacing).”

Commonwealth v. Chernosky, 874 A.2d 123 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2005). “While police opined that the motorist was speeding, the motorist had not been clocked for three-tenths of a mile, as required by the provision of the Motor Vehicle Code related to speeding, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(a). The Court concluded that police had failed to identify any Motor…”

Myers v. State, 909 A.2d 1048 (Md. 2006). “§ 3361, Driving a vehicle at safe speed provides, in relevant part: "No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard for the actual and potential hazards then existing, nor at a speed greater than will…”

Commonwealth v. Cohen, 605 A.2d 814 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1992). · cites it 4× “§ 3362 the Commonwealth must present evidence which would satisfy the requirements of 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368. As a consequence, we also hold that a police officer's uncorroborated *467 testimony as to speed is insufficient to support a conviction for violating Section 3362.”

Commonwealth v. Whitmyer, 668 A.2d 1113 (Pa. 1995). “This determination was based on the fact that Appellee did not fail to yield to any oncoming vehicle when he entered the highway nor did he pass the vehicle in front of him in a posted no passing zone.”

Commonwealth v. Cummings, 487 A.2d 897 (Pa. 1985). · cites it 4× “The testing of the stopwatch was done by Leitzel's Jewelry, which was designated as an official testing station by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(d). The photocopy of the certificate established that on October 19, 1981, Leitzel's…”

Martin v. Commonwealth, Dep't of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 870 A.2d 982 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2005). · cites it 4× “The Vehicle Code at 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(a) requires that for a speedometer clock to be valid the vehicle's speed must be measured "for a distance of not less than three-tenths of a mile.”

Commonwealth v. Leet, 585 A.2d 1033 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1991). · cites it 2× “§ 3353 (authorizing police officers to make exceptions to parking prohibitions); 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368 (authorizing police officers to time rate of speed of any vehicle on any highway); 75 Pa.”

Show all 43 citing cases →

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(a) — 12 cases

Martin v. DOT, Bureau of Driver Licensing, 905 A.2d 438 (Pa. 2006). “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(a). Here, Officer Sollenberger only clocked appellant's speed for 100 yards while still in Hampden Township.”

Commonwealth v. McCandless, 648 A.2d 309 (Pa. 1994). “[4] 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368 provides, in pertinent part: (a) Speedometers authorized.”

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(b) — 2 cases

Com. v. Pollick, C., 2024 Pa. Super. 79 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2024).

Com. v. Li, X. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025).

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(c) — 3 cases

Commonwealth v. DePasquale, 501 A.2d 626 (Pa. 1985). “The erudite explication of the majority's conclusion that the ESP machine used in this case was an electric device within the meaning of section 3368(c) of the Motor Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(c), does not address the underlying issue in this appeal.”

Commonwealth v. DePasquale, 476 A.2d 419 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1984).

Commonwealth v. Peters, 4 Pa. D. & C.4th 33 (1989).

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(c)(1) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. DePasquale, 476 A.2d 419 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1984).

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(c)(3) — 2 cases

Commonwealth v. Smolow, 527 A.2d 131 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1987).

Com. v. Bernard, W. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2019).

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(c)(l) — 1 case

Commonwealth v. Gilbert, 36 Pa. D. & C.3d 100 (1984).

— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3368(d) — 13 cases

Commonwealth v. Cummings, 487 A.2d 897 (Pa. 1985). “The testing of the stopwatch was done by Leitzel's Jewelry, which was designated as an official testing station by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S. § 3368(d). The photocopy of the certificate established that on October 19, 1981, Leitzel's…”

Commonwealth v. Gordon, 633 A.2d 1199 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1993).

Commonwealth v. Little, 512 A.2d 674 (Pa. 1986).

J.Z. Wilson, Jr. v. Bureau of Driver Licensing, 209 A.3d 1143 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2019).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.