Shawn M. Dorward, Esq. Contact Check Attorney Dorward's Discipline History

Shawn M. Dorward, Esq.

Litigation Associate

Attorney Shawn Dorward is recognized as one of the most dedicated and hardworking attorneys in Pennsylvania, making him an outstanding protector of your rights. He has handled hundreds of cases ranging from Pennsylvania DUI (including CDL and refusal cases), to DUI with drugs, assault, battery. With your case, Shawn vows to work extremely hard to secure for you the best possible outcome.

Shawn pledges to provide you with informed analysis and honest advice to help you make the right decision for your case and your future.

Attorney Dorward's primary practice is criminal law, with specialization in DUI. He is especially well versed in challenging Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) from breath and blood testing. As a trial attorney, he is not afraid to argue matters before a judge and challenge the State’s sloppy forensic labs. A brutal cross-examiner, Shawn has repeatedly forced police officers to admit to untrustworthy evidence. As a criminal defense attorney, Shawn excels in challenging cases with the latest in forensic science.

In contrast to his aggressive DUI work, Shawn has also earned a reputation as a caring and knowledgeable family lawyer by handling divorce, custody, and adoption cases with all the necessary patience and care each case deserves.

Attorney Dorward is admitted to practice before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and all Pennsylvania State Courts. He is also admitted to practice before the United States District Court-Middle District of Pennsylvania and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Court. He is an active member of the American and Pennsylvania Bar Associations. He is also a member of the National College for DUI Defense, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and the Pennsylvania Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

With hundreds of hours of advanced DUI and forensic science training, Shawn’s combination of knowledge and experience are unmatched by other DUI lawyers in Pennsylvania. Dorward brings his experience to the courtroom to defend your rights.

Some highlights of Attorney Dorward's specialized DUI training are:

On most nights, you’ll find Attorney Dorward in his office, preparing his cases long after the support staff has left. A firm believer in hard work, preparation, and dedication, Shawn feels at home in the courtroom because that's where he excels in protecting your rights. Attorney Dorward prides himself on promptly returning phone calls and being available to you 24 hours a day.

Attorney Dorward earned his undergraduate degree at Temple University where he majored in Sport Management. Through his major he had the opportunity of working with several major professional teams in Philadelphia including the Phillies and 76ers. While at Temple, he also participated in student government and was a member of the Sigma Phi Epsilon Fraternity where he had the opportunity to volunteer for several local community outreach programs.

After graduating from Temple, Attorney Dorward attended Texas Southern University's Thurgood Marshall School of Law in Houston, Texas. Here he dedicated his studies to criminal defense and in his third year participated in the criminal law clinic where he had the opportunity to represent individuals charged with summary and misdemeanor offenses. He also worked with a local criminal defense attorney primarily on a death penalty case where the Defendants life was ultimately spared.

While outside of work Attorney Dorward enjoys spending time with his family and working out in his local gym. With every aspect of his life, he attempts to be the best and always strides to put his best efforts forward.

Use the download link to the left to download Attorney Dorward's resume.

Attorney Dorward

  • Holds a current Breath Alcohol Technician (BAT) rating as recognized by the USDOT;
  • Instructor rating in the Standardized Field Sobriety Tests, Advanced Roadside Impairment Driving Enforcement, Drugs that Impair Driving and Drug Recognition Expert Courses based on the NHTSA curriculum
  • Has been conferred plaques in recognition of attendance at the NCDD Summer Session held at Harvard School of Law in Cambridge, Massachusetts;
  • Passed the proficiency based testing in Advanced Forensic Blood and Urine

DUI Certificates and Training

Seminar Nametags

Other Credits

From Clients

Shawn went above and beyond for me tp help me get through this situation. I was looking at some very negative consequences and he fought for me to get the very best outcome possible. I am so thankful I had Shawn and Amanda on my side. They answered every question I had and went out of their way to make sure I had all the information provided to me so I could remain positive during this experience. Thank You!!!!!!!
Don't look any further!!!from Attorney Dorward’s Avvo profile

Shawn and his assistant, Amanda, were super helpful throughout my whole representation. They were super quick to get back to me, and explained everything in detail. As this was my first offense, I had a million questions and they were always understanding and put me at ease. Shawn and his team are great to work with and I would hire him again if I needed to!
First offense DUIfrom Attorney Dorward’s Avvo profile

Scared and racked with anxiety, I reached out to Shawn after being charged with a Tier 3 DUI while traveling through PA on vacation. Being an out of state resident and first time offender, I was clueless about what the PA court system could do to me. Shawn immediately put me at ease just from our consultation; clearly and concisely walking me through all the options I had. Right after hanging up the phone I knew I wanted to hire Shawn to represent me.

Between the time we first spoke and the date of my hearing (approx. 8 weeks), Shawn and his (absolutely AMAZING) paralegal, Amanda, kept in constant communication with me: providing real-time status updates about my case, reminders of key milestones so I wouldn't miss them, and detailed instructions on where to go and what to expect on the day of my hearing.

When I arrived at the courthouse Shawn had already spoken to the D.A., had all my paperwork squared away, and took me to a private area to chat through next steps. After meeting with the magistrate, Shawn stayed with me for another 45 minutes helping me map out key dates going forward, the different fee amounts I'll need to keep in mind, and who my main point-of-contact would be during probation.

Honestly, I can't say enough good things about Shawn and Amanda both. These two are top notch: they understand every nuance of PA DUI law, have one-on-one relationships with the right people in the court system, and were ALWAYS available if I needed to get a hold of them.

Shawn and Amanda, I can't thank you both enough!
Thank you, Shawn!from Attorney Dorward’s Avvo profile

Attorney Dorward helped me with my DUI case, which included two additional charges. He was able to get the DA to drop the two additional charges and get me into the ARD program. I am very thankful for all is help and would highly recommend him.
Thank you Shawn Dorwardfrom Attorney Dorward’s Avvo profile

I had a total of 7 charges including a DUI. Shawn negotiated with the DA and had 6 charges withdrawn. I was sentenced with 6 months probation.

This review is from a person who hired this attorney. Hired attorney
Charges Withdrawnfrom Attorney Dorward’s Avvo profile

From Peers

Attorney Michael Sherman, Pittsburgh PA

Shawn Dorward is a well-known DUI defense attorney who is respected by his peers for his outstanding trial skills. Shawn has traveled all over the United States to learn the latest scientific techniques and trial tactics involved in defending DUI cases. Shawn possesses superior knowledge in defending DUI cases. I endorse Shawn’s work as a DUI defense attorney. He’s someone you can trust to handle your case.

from Attorney Dorward's Avvo profile

Attorney Jesse Hernandez, San Antonio TX

Shawn is an outstanding criminal defense attorney. His work ethic and desire to get the best results for his clients separate him from his peers. When I have clients in Pennsylvania that ask me who I recommend they hire for their criminal defense cases I tell them: Shawn Dorward.

from Attorney Dorward's Avvo profile

Attorney Richard Lawson, Atlanta GA

He is well thought of in the legal community. He is a skilled litigator and negotiator. You are well-served with him on your side.

from Attorney Dorward's Avvo profile

Attorney David Brengle, Troy MO

Attorney Dorward is a trained in the latest and best DWI defenses. I know that he attend DWI training seminars on a regular basis where he has developed skills rivaling the best DWI defense lawyers in the nation. Attorney Dorward is a part of the leading DWI defense firm in Pennsylvania. Any person in Pennsylvania would be lucky to have Attorney Dorward working on their case.

from Attorney Dorward's Avvo profile

Attorney Todd La Neve, Clarksburg WV

Shawn is a rising star. His style and presence match perfectly with a solid legal mind and combine to make him an attorney in whom clients can be confident and comfortable. His role in the McShane Firm just ensures that he will continue to receive top-notch training and experience that will set him apart from the pack in PA. I happily endorse Shawn's quality work.

from Attorney Dorward's Avvo profile

COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Daniel Eugene LANDIS, II

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania has issued a decision in the case of _COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania v. Daniel Eugene LANDIS, II, Appellant,_ 2108 MDA 2012 (April 8, 2014), an appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Juniata County, Judge Kenneth A. Mummah, Criminal Division, CP–34–CR–0000167–2010.The Panel was composed of Judges BENDER, WECHT and FITZGERALD who wrote the Opinion. There was no dissent. The Appellant appealed from a judgment of sentence entered in the Juniata County Court of Common Pleas after a jury found him guilty of, /inter alia,/ DUI-highest rate of alcohol.Appellant claimed that he was entitled to a new trial because the finding that his blood-alcohol level was over .16% within two hours of driving was against the weight of the evidence. The Panel agreed and ruled that the Appellant was entitled to a new trial on the count of DUI—highest rate of alcohol because the blood-alcohol test result of .164%, which was relied on by the Commonwealth, was subject to a 10% margin of error and there was no further evidence to sustain the jury's finding that his blood alcohol level was .16% or above within two hours of driving. Section 3802(c) of the Motor Vehicle Code provides that: An individual may not drive, operate or be in actual physical control of the movement of a vehicle after imbibing a sufficient amount of alcohol such that the alcohol concentration in the individual's blood or breath is 0.16% or higher within two hours after the individual has driven, operated or been in actual physical control of the movement of the vehicle. The Superior Court agreed that the jury's verdict on the count of DUI-highest rate of alcohol was against the weight of the evidence. The evidence that his blood-alcohol level was .164% was unreliable because the medical technician only took one sample of blood and ran only one test. Moreover, the result from an Avid Axsym machine was less accurate than a gas chromatography test, and the evidence at trial established a 10% margin of error in the results from the Avid Axsym machine. The trial record did not contain a reasoned basis for accepting the specific reading of .164% as either accurate or precise. There was no support for a finding that the reading registered by the Avid Axsym machine was any more reliable than the possible blood-alcohol levels within the 10% margin of error. Moreover, since there was no direct or circumstantial evidence regarding the possible applications of the 10% margin of error, the trial evidence required the jury to speculate that Appellant's actual blood alcohol content was .16% or higher within two hours of driving. Therefore, the Panel held that the Appellant was entitled to a new trial on the count of DUI—highest rate of alcohol. The attorney for the Appellant was Shawn Michael Dorward, of the McShane Firm, Harrisburg, PA.

Commonwealth v. Yohe

Commonwealth v. Yohe - The firm once again finds itself involved with the Supreme Court of the United States. We recently filed a petition in the High Court for Writ of Certiorari. This is the case where we argued the NMS labs Henry-Ford-Assembly-line-like forensic science method violates the 6th Amendment’s Confrontation Clause. We presented the following question: The United States Constitution’s Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to a fair trial – including the right to confront “witnesses” against them. Here, the government introduced a forensic toxicology report via a “witness” who reviewed and confirmed laboratory analysts’ work – but did not perform, observe, or have any personal connection with the analysis. Does a “witness” who reviews and confirms others’ work violate the Confrontation Clause” In other words, who is the “witness” against the defendant? At trial, the government did not present the particular witness from NMS Labs who physically conducted the accused’s blood analysis. Instead, the government and NMS presented only the PhD who reviewed the data generated by the particular witness. Trial counsel, the McShane Firm’s own Attorney Shawn Dorward, timely objected—making a complete proffer to preserve the Confrontation Clause error. Attorney Dorward carefully preserved his objection under both federal and state law. The trial court overruled the objection and allowed the “surrogate” witness to testify in lieu of the particular witness. Despite Attorney Dorward’s best efforts, the Judge disagreed with Dorward at trial and returned a guilty verdict for the BAC count, but found the accused not guilty of DUI: General Impairment. Never losing sight of the Constitutional harm, Attorney Dorward again asserted error in a well-written post-sentencing motion and accompanying legal memorandum. Sometimes, judges change their minds. And, upon reviewing the “surrogate’s” testimony and the presented arguments, the trial court agreed the government violated the accused’s Constitutional rights. At the time this all happened, the trial court was bound by the case Commonwealth v. Barton-Martin, which held that a violation of confrontation required the charge at issue to be dismissed. Despite the binding precedent of Barton-Martin, the trial court ordered a new trial as the remedy. Knowing that remedy to be in error in that the proper remedy under Barton-Martin was vacating and discharging the defendant of the conviction, Attorney Dorward filed a motion for reconsideration with the trial court for the remedy. A hearing was scheduled for this motion; however, prior to the court date the government sought appeal of the grant of the new trial. Thus, the government became the appellant. The McShane Firm, LLC became the appellee. After receiving briefs a three justice panel of the Superior Court disagreed with the trial court and overturned the grant of the new trial. In essence the three justices in the Superior Court, in a published opinion, held the testimony of the “surrogate” was sufficient Confrontation for the accused. Attorney Dorward then enlisted the help of Attorneys Justin McShane and Josh Auriemma to perfect a petition for allowance of appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Typically, Pennsylvania’s highest court grants very few of these motions—but the court granted it here. The Court wanted to help guide the issue and hear the lawyers on both sides argue the issue. On that appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, several organizations wrote amicus briefs—“friends of the court”—including: the National College for DUI Defense Attorneys (NCDD); the Pennsylvania Association of Drunk Driving Defense Attorneys (PADDDA); the Pennsylvania Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers (PACDL); and the Philadelphia Defender Association. Ultimately, after the Court received briefs from the accused, the government, and the interested organizations, the case went to oral argument. Attorney Dorward argued the case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Sadly, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s decision. Following the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s affirmation, The McShane Firm, LLC went to the mat. With the hard work of Attorneys Justin McShane, TC Tanski, and Shawn Dorward as well as Richard Roberts, a law student intern, the firm drafted and filed a Petition for Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court. Now that we’ve filed the Petition, it’s up to the United States Supreme Court to either deny the petition or grant it. Once a Petition is granted by the High Court, briefs are filed and arguments are presented.

If you're looking for professionally aggressive representation, contact The McShane Firm today and put Harrisburg's most highly-trained attorneys in your corner. WE FIGHT!