Pennsylvania’s Hands-Free Driving Law: What Paul Miller’s Law Means After an Accident

Pennsylvania’s hands-free driving law, known as Paul Miller’s Law, is an important change for drivers, passengers, pedestrians, cyclists, and anyone injured by a distracted driver. The law bans hand-held use of interactive mobile devices while driving and gives police broader authority to stop drivers who are holding or using a phone behind the wheel.

For accident victims, the law matters for more than just traffic tickets. If another driver was holding a phone, scrolling, texting, recording, browsing, or otherwise using a hand-held device before a crash, that conduct may become important evidence in a personal injury claim. It can help show that the driver was distracted, violated Pennsylvania traffic law, and failed to use reasonable care.

This article explains what the Pennsylvania hands-free driving law does, what Paul Miller’s Law means after an accident, how distracted driving evidence can affect liability, and what injured victims should do if they suspect the other driver was using a phone before the crash.

What Is Pennsylvania’s Hands-Free Driving Law?

The Pennsylvania hands-free driving law is a statewide distracted driving law that prohibits drivers from using an interactive mobile device while operating a motor vehicle. The law is officially codified at 75 Pa.C.S. § 3316.1 and is commonly known as Paul Miller’s Law.

The law took effect on June 5, 2025. During the first 12 months, drivers could receive written warnings for violations. After the warning period ended in June 2026, violations became punishable as summary offenses with a $50 fine, plus court costs and other fees.

PennDOT explains that the law bans hand-held device use while driving, including when a vehicle is temporarily stopped because of traffic, a traffic light, a stop sign, or another momentary delay. You can review PennDOT’s distracted driving guidance here: PennDOT Distracted Driving.

Why Is It Called Paul Miller’s Law?

The law is named in memory of Paul Miller Jr., who was killed in a 2010 crash involving a distracted driver. His mother, Eileen Miller, became a leading advocate for stronger distracted driving laws in Pennsylvania. The purpose of Paul Miller’s Law is to reduce preventable crashes by making it clear that drivers should keep their hands off their phones and their attention on the road.

The name matters because the law is not just a technical update to Pennsylvania’s vehicle code. It was passed in response to the real consequences of distracted driving. A few seconds of looking away from the road can cause a life-changing or fatal crash. For injured victims and grieving families, the issue is not only whether a driver gets a ticket. The deeper question is whether the driver’s distraction caused harm that could have been avoided.

What Does Paul Miller’s Law Prohibit?

Paul Miller’s Law focuses on the use of an “interactive mobile device.” Under Pennsylvania law, that can include a handheld wireless telephone, smartphone, personal digital assistant, portable or mobile computer, or similar device used for voice communication, texting, emailing, internet browsing, instant messaging, games, photos, video, social media, or electronic data.

Issue	What the Pennsylvania Hands-Free Driving Law Says	Why It Matters After an Accident
Hand-held phone use	Drivers may not use an interactive mobile device while driving.	Holding or using a phone before impact can support a distracted driving claim.
Temporary stops	“Driving” includes being temporarily stopped in traffic, at a red light, at a stop sign, or during another momentary delay.	A driver cannot avoid the law by saying the car was stopped at a light when they were using the device.
Holding or supporting a device	The law includes using a hand to hold the device or supporting it with another body part.	Witnesses may be able to describe seeing the driver holding or balancing a phone.
Dialing or answering	Pressing more than a single button to dial or answer can qualify as prohibited use.	Phone interaction immediately before a crash may be relevant evidence.
Reaching for a device	Reaching in a way that moves the driver out of a seated, belted driving position is included.	A driver looking or reaching for a dropped phone may lose control or fail to react.
Emergency exception	Device use is allowed when necessary to contact law enforcement or emergency services to prevent injury or property damage.	Emergency use may be a defense to a traffic violation, but it must fit the facts.
Fine	Violations are summary offenses with a $50 fine, plus possible court costs and fees.	The traffic fine is separate from the injured person’s civil claim for damages.

The law still permits certain hands-free uses. Drivers can use hands-free technology to make calls, use GPS, listen to music, or contact emergency responders. The difference is that the device should not be held, supported, or manually used in a way that violates the statute.

How Paul Miller’s Law Changes Distracted Driving Cases

Before Paul Miller’s Law, Pennsylvania already had a texting-while-driving ban. But distracted driving is broader than texting. Drivers use phones for maps, videos, emails, social media, music, calls, photos, rideshare apps, delivery apps, and web browsing. A crash may happen because a driver was looking down at a phone even if they were not actively sending a text.

The Pennsylvania hands-free driving law helps close that gap. It makes hand-held device use a primary offense, meaning police can stop a driver for that violation alone. After an accident, that can matter because a citation, police observations, or witness statements about phone use may help show that the driver was distracted.

However, a traffic citation is not the same thing as a full personal injury claim. A citation may support the claim, but the injured person still needs to prove fault, causation, injuries, damages, and insurance coverage. Likewise, the absence of a citation does not mean the other driver was not distracted. Many distracted driving crashes are difficult to prove at the scene because drivers may deny phone use, hide the device, or claim they were paying attention.

Pennsylvania and National Distracted Driving Data

Distracted driving is a major safety concern in Pennsylvania and across the country. NHTSA reports that distracted driving claimed 3,208 lives nationwide in 2024 and injured 315,167 people. PennDOT reported 109,515 total reportable crashes in Pennsylvania in 2025, including 979 fatal crashes. PennDOT also noted that distracted-driving crash data is believed to be underreported because drivers may be reluctant to admit they were distracted at the time of a crash.

Distracted Driving / Crash Data	Current Figure	Source / Significance
U.S. distracted driving deaths in 2024	3,208	NHTSA reports thousands of deaths in crashes involving distracted drivers.
U.S. distracted driving injuries in 2024	315,167	NHTSA reports hundreds of thousands of injuries tied to distracted driving.
Pennsylvania reportable crashes in 2025	109,515	PennDOT reported the second-lowest crash total on record, behind only 2020.
Pennsylvania fatal crashes in 2025	979	Fatal crashes were the lowest on record.
Pennsylvania distracted-driver fatalities in 2025	54	PennDOT reported distracted-driver fatalities rose slightly from 49 in 2024 to 54 in 2025.
Driver behavior in Pennsylvania fatal crashes	83%	PennDOT reports driver behavior is the leading factor in most fatal crashes statewide.

You can review national distracted driving data through NHTSA, Pennsylvania crash data through PennDOT Crash Facts & Statistics, and searchable crash information through the Pennsylvania Crash Information Tool.

What Paul Miller’s Law Means After an Accident

After a car accident, Paul Miller’s Law can matter in several ways. First, it may help establish that the at-fault driver violated a safety rule. If a driver was holding a phone, scrolling, typing, recording, or using an app at the time of the crash, that violation can support the argument that the driver was negligent.

Second, the law may help investigators and attorneys ask better questions. Instead of focusing only on whether the driver was texting, the investigation can look at broader phone use. Was the driver using GPS? Was a phone mounted or hand-held? Was the driver looking down? Did a witness see the phone in the driver’s hand? Were there social media posts, calls, texts, photos, or app activity around the time of the crash?

Third, the law can help explain the danger to an insurance company, judge, or jury. A distracted driver may claim that looking at a phone was harmless or only took a second. Paul Miller’s Law reinforces that hand-held device use behind the wheel is dangerous enough to be specifically prohibited in Pennsylvania.

Does a Hands-Free Law Violation Automatically Prove Negligence?

A violation of the Pennsylvania hands-free driving law may be powerful evidence, but it does not automatically resolve every issue in a car accident claim. The injured person still needs to show that the driver’s conduct caused or contributed to the crash and that the crash caused the claimed injuries.

For example, if a driver was cited for holding a phone immediately before rear-ending another vehicle, the citation may strongly support a negligence claim. But the insurance company may still dispute injury severity, medical treatment, lost wages, or whether all claimed symptoms were caused by the crash. In another case, a driver may have violated the hands-free law but argue that a separate factor caused the collision.

That is why distracted driving cases require both legal and factual proof. The traffic violation is important, but it should be supported by the police report, witness statements, vehicle damage, medical records, phone evidence, crash reconstruction, and other available documentation.

Evidence That Can Help Prove Distracted Driving

Distracted driving is often denied. A driver who caused a crash may not admit they were holding a phone, checking a message, or looking at an app. Evidence needs to be preserved as early as possible.

Useful evidence may include:

• The police report, citations, crash narrative, and officer observations.
• Witness statements from passengers, other drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, or nearby workers.
• Photos or video showing the driver holding a phone before or after the crash.
• Dashcam footage, traffic camera footage, doorbell cameras, or business surveillance video.
• Phone records showing calls, messages, data use, app activity, or other device interaction near the crash time.
• Vehicle infotainment data, Bluetooth connection history, GPS activity, or app-based driving data.
• The driver’s own statements at the scene, in texts, to police, or to the insurance company.
• Social media posts, photos, videos, or livestream activity created close to the time of the crash.

Phone evidence can be sensitive and may require formal legal steps to obtain. An insurance company may not voluntarily gather everything needed to prove distraction. If the crash caused serious injuries, an attorney can help preserve evidence, send notices, request records, subpoena information when appropriate, and identify whether device use contributed to the collision.

What Should You Do If You Suspect the Other Driver Was on Their Phone?

If you believe the other driver was distracted, treat that detail as important from the beginning. Even a small observation can matter later. Maybe you saw the driver looking down before impact. Maybe a witness saw the phone in their hand. Maybe the driver apologized and said, “I didn’t see you,” or “I looked down for a second.” Those facts should be documented.

After a suspected distracted driving crash:

1. Call 911 and report the crash, especially if anyone is injured or the other driver may have been distracted.
2. Tell the responding officer if you saw phone use or if a witness mentioned it.
3. Get names, phone numbers, and statements from witnesses before they leave the scene.
4. Take photos of vehicle positions, damage, skid marks, debris, traffic lights, road signs, and the surrounding area.
5. Look for cameras on nearby businesses, homes, buses, trucks, intersections, parking lots, or dashcams.
6. Get medical treatment promptly and explain all symptoms clearly.
7. Speak with a lawyer before giving detailed statements to the insurance company or accepting a settlement.

The goal is to preserve the evidence before it disappears. Surveillance video may be overwritten quickly. Witnesses may become difficult to find. Phone data may require timely preservation. The sooner the issue is investigated, the stronger the claim may be.

How the Law Can Affect Insurance Claims

Insurance companies look for ways to dispute fault and reduce claim value. In a distracted driving case, the at-fault driver’s insurance company may argue that there is no proof of phone use, that the phone use did not cause the crash, or that the injured person was partly responsible.

Paul Miller’s Law can help push back against those arguments when the facts support it. If the driver violated the Pennsylvania hands-free driving law, the injured person can argue that the driver broke a clear safety rule designed to prevent exactly this kind of harm. That can strengthen the liability portion of the claim.

However, insurance companies may still fight over damages. They may argue that the injuries are minor, that treatment was unnecessary, that pain came from a preexisting condition, or that the accident did not cause long-term harm. This is why medical documentation is just as important as proof of distraction. A strong case connects the distracted driving evidence to the crash and then connects the crash to the injuries and losses.

What If the Distracted Driver Was Working?

Some distracted driving accidents involve employees, commercial drivers, delivery drivers, rideshare drivers, truck drivers, or workers using a phone for job-related reasons. These cases may involve additional legal issues. If the driver was working at the time of the crash, the employer may be responsible depending on the facts.

For example, a delivery driver using an app, a commercial driver communicating with dispatch, or an employee taking a work call may raise questions about company policies, training, supervision, vehicle ownership, and whether the driver was acting within the scope of employment. In some cases, the employer’s insurance coverage may be much larger than the individual driver’s policy.

These claims require careful investigation. The driver’s phone use may be only one part of a broader safety failure. A company that pressures drivers to respond quickly, meet unrealistic schedules, or use apps while driving may become part of the liability analysis.

What If the Driver Was Using GPS?

Paul Miller’s Law does not ban every use of navigation. Drivers can still use GPS and hands-free technology. The problem is how the device is used. A mounted navigation system or hands-free GPS use may be allowed, while holding a phone, manually typing, scrolling, or reaching for a device while driving may create a violation.

After an accident, “I was just using GPS” should not end the investigation. The facts matter. Was the phone mounted? Was the driver holding it? Were they typing an address? Were they looking down repeatedly? Did they reach for the device? Did the distraction cause them to miss a stopped car, pedestrian, cyclist, red light, stop sign, or lane change?

The difference between lawful hands-free use and dangerous manual use may be important to the claim.

Common Mistakes After a Distracted Driving Accident

Accident victims can unintentionally weaken their claim by waiting too long or assuming distraction cannot be proven. After a crash involving suspected phone use, avoid these mistakes:

• Assuming there is no distracted driving case unless the driver was cited at the scene.
• Failing to tell police that you saw the driver looking down or holding a phone.
• Waiting too long to look for surveillance, dashcam, or witness evidence.
• Giving the insurance company a broad recorded statement without legal guidance.
• Accepting a quick settlement before the full injury impact and liability evidence are understood.

Distracted driving cases often depend on details that are easiest to preserve early. A quick settlement may benefit the insurance company, not the injured person.

Does Paul Miller’s Law Apply If the Car Is Stopped at a Red Light?

Yes. One of the most important parts of the Pennsylvania hands-free driving law is that “driving” includes being temporarily stationary because of traffic, a traffic control device, or another momentary delay. That means the law can apply when a driver is stopped at a red light, sitting in traffic, or paused at a stop sign.

This matters because many crashes happen when traffic starts moving again. A driver looking at a phone at a red light may roll forward into another vehicle, miss a changing traffic signal, fail to see a pedestrian in the crosswalk, or accelerate without noticing stopped traffic ahead. The law encourages drivers to keep the phone down until they are safely pulled over and stopped in a location where the vehicle can remain stationary.

Can You Still Have a Claim If the Driver Was Not Ticketed?

Yes. A distracted driving injury claim can still exist even if the driver was not ticketed under Paul Miller’s Law. Police officers can only cite what they observe or can establish at the scene. If the driver hides the phone, denies use, or if the distraction is not obvious, a citation may not be issued immediately.

Civil claims can involve additional investigation beyond the traffic stop or crash report. Attorneys may seek phone records, surveillance footage, vehicle data, witness statements, and other evidence that was not available to the responding officer. The absence of a citation may make the case more challenging, but it does not automatically defeat the claim.

The Pennsylvania hands-free driving law is an important step in reducing distracted driving crashes. Paul Miller’s Law makes it clear that drivers should not hold, support, or manually use interactive mobile devices while driving, even when temporarily stopped in traffic or at a red light.

After an accident, the law can play an important role in proving negligence. If the at-fault driver was using a hand-held phone or other interactive mobile device before the crash, that conduct may support a personal injury claim. But the claim still needs evidence. A citation, witness statement, phone record, video, or police observation can help connect the distraction to the collision.

If you were injured in a Pennsylvania accident and believe the other driver was using a phone, KaplunMarx can help investigate what happened, deal with the insurance company, and fight for the compensation you deserve. Contact KaplunMarx today for a free consultation.

FAQs About Pennsylvania’s Hands-Free Driving Law and Accident Claims

What is Pennsylvania’s hands-free driving law?

Pennsylvania’s hands-free driving law, also known as Paul Miller’s Law, prohibits drivers from using a hand-held interactive mobile device while driving. The law applies even when a vehicle is temporarily stopped because of traffic, a red light, a stop sign, or another momentary delay.

When did Paul Miller’s Law take effect?

Paul Miller’s Law took effect on June 5, 2025. During the first 12 months, drivers could receive written warnings. After the warning period ended in June 2026, violations became punishable as summary offenses with a $50 fine, plus court costs and other fees.

Can police stop a driver just for holding a phone in Pennsylvania?

Yes. Paul Miller’s Law makes hand-held device use while driving a primary offense. That means police may stop a driver for violating the hands-free law, even if no other traffic violation is observed.

Does the law apply at red lights or in stopped traffic?

Yes. Pennsylvania’s hands-free driving law applies while a driver is temporarily stopped because of traffic, a traffic signal, a stop sign, or another momentary delay. Drivers should wait until they are safely pulled over and stopped in a safe location before manually using a device.

What devices are covered by Paul Miller’s Law?

The law covers interactive mobile devices such as handheld wireless phones, smartphones, portable or mobile computers, personal digital assistants, and similar devices used for calls, texting, email, internet browsing, instant messaging, games, photos, videos, social media, or electronic data.

Can a hands-free law violation help my accident claim?

Yes. If the at-fault driver violated the Pennsylvania hands-free driving law, that violation may support your argument that the driver was negligent. However, you still need to prove that the distraction caused or contributed to the crash and that the crash caused your injuries.

What if the distracted driver was not ticketed?

You may still have a claim even if the driver was not ticketed. Police may not always have enough evidence at the scene to issue a citation. A personal injury lawyer may be able to investigate phone records, witnesses, surveillance footage, vehicle data, and other evidence.

Is using GPS illegal under Paul Miller’s Law?

Hands-free GPS use is generally allowed. The issue is whether the driver was holding, supporting, manually typing, scrolling, or reaching for the device in a prohibited way. If the driver was manually using a phone for navigation and caused a crash, that conduct may become important evidence.

What evidence can prove the other driver was distracted?

Evidence may include witness statements, police observations, citations, dashcam footage, surveillance video, phone records, app activity, social media posts, vehicle data, and the driver’s own statements. This evidence should be preserved as soon as possible after the crash.

Should I contact a lawyer after a distracted driving accident?

Yes, especially if you were injured or suspect the other driver was using a phone. Distracted driving claims often require fast evidence preservation, insurance communication, and legal investigation. A lawyer can help determine whether Paul Miller’s Law applies and how it may affect your claim.