Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3816 (2026)

  Requirements for driving under influence offenders.

✓ 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

§ 3816.  Requirements for driving under influence offenders.

(a)  Evaluation using Court Reporting Network.--In addition to any other requirements of the court, every person convicted of a violation of section 3802 (relating to driving under influence of alcohol or controlled substance) and every person offered Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition as a result of a charge of a violation of section 3802 shall, prior to sentencing or receiving Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition or other preliminary disposition, be evaluated using Court Reporting Network instruments issued by the department and any other additional evaluation techniques deemed appropriate by the court to determine the extent of the person's involvement with alcohol or controlled substances and to assist the court in determining what sentencing, probation or conditions of Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition would benefit the person or the public.

(b)  Court-ordered intervention or treatment.--A record shall be submitted to the department as to whether the court did or did not order a defendant to attend drug and alcohol treatment pursuant to the requirements of sections 3804 (relating to penalties), 3814 (relating to drug and alcohol assessments) and 3815 (relating to mandatory sentencing). If the court orders treatment, a report shall be forwarded to the department as to whether the defendant successfully completed the program. If a defendant fails to successfully complete a program of treatment as ordered by the court, the suspension shall remain in effect until the department is notified by the court that the defendant has successfully completed treatment and the defendant is otherwise eligible for restoration of his operating privilege. In order to implement the recordkeeping requirements of this section, the department and the court shall work together to exchange pertinent information about a defendant's case, including attendance and completion of treatment or failure to complete treatment.

 

Cross References.  Section 3816 is referred to in sections 1541, 3807, 3814 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2020–2025 · leading case: Com. v. Bomar-Sweet, T. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
Com. v. Bomar-Sweet, T. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. § 3816(a). A CRN evaluation is “[a] uniform prescreening evaluation procedure for all DUI offenders to aid and support clinical treatment recommendations offered to the judiciary, prior to sentencing.”
Com. v. Fuller, S., Jr. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2022). “2 ; see also 75 Pa.C.S. § 3816 (explaining CRN evaluations determine “the extent of the person’s involvement with alcohol or controlled substances and to assist the court in determining what sentencing, probation or conditions of Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition would…”
Com. v. Moser, L. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025). “zures in Article I Section 8 of Pennsylvania’s Constitution and Fourth Amendment United States Constitution? 5) Did the PCRA court [err] in denying relief that appellant was not in actual physical control of the vehicle or in control of movement or management of the vehicle? 6)…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 3816(a) — 2 cases
Com. v. Bomar-Sweet, T. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020). “75 Pa.C.S. § 3816(a). A CRN evaluation is “[a] uniform prescreening evaluation procedure for all DUI offenders to aid and support clinical treatment recommendations offered to the judiciary, prior to sentencing.”
Com. v. Moser, L. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2025). “zures in Article I Section 8 of Pennsylvania’s Constitution and Fourth Amendment United States Constitution? 5) Did the PCRA court [err] in denying relief that appellant was not in actual physical control of the vehicle or in control of movement or management of the vehicle? 6)…”
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.