A jury trial involving drugs and guns highlighted a long day at Common Pleas Courtroom #6 yesterday. While a few of the cases involved incidents that occured in West Chester, this particular incident involved troopers from the State Police at Embreeville on a traffic stop that originated in West Chester. More on that case shortly...
Elsewhere on the docket today, Common Pleas Court Judge Howard Riley, Jr. sentenced a 20-year-old WCU student to Chester County Prison as part of a plea agreement relating to a drug case on campus. John Blystone, 20, of Wallingford, Delaware County, admitted that on January 18, he sold 5 pills of Hydrocordone to an undercover WCPD officer for $20.00 cash while in Tyson Hall on the WCU North Campus. Blystone faced a mandatory 2 year minimum jail term in state prison as the drug deal took place within a school zone, however, as part of the deal, the DA's office agreed to waive the mandatory sentence.
Additionally, Blystone had been placed on Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition (ARD) in Delaware County following drug charges in 2005 following a drug possession arrest in Media (CP-23-CR-2302-2005). It appears, according to available court records, that ARD was successfully completed (though the files haven't been updated at the AOPC web site).
Adding insult to injury, Blystone admitted to Judge Riley during the hearing that he had smoked marijuana within the past 30 days. When Blystone pointed out his grade point average, which on the surface seemed impressive, Judge Riley responded, "I don't know how you got a 3.0, because you're not acting real smart." That would be the understatement of the year...
Blystone was sentenced to a county prison term of 6 to 23 months, followed by a combined 3 years probation thereafter, plus 75 hours community service, plus fines and court costs on one count of Possession with Intent to Sell or Distribute and one count of Conspiracy. Judge Riley advised Blystone that this was "his last break" and that future run-ins with the law would likely land him in state prison. (CP-15-CR-0001015-2007)
A co-defendant in the case, Jordan Mohl, 19, of Lebanon, is scheduled for trial in front of Judge Anthony Sarcione next month (CP-15-CR-0000998-2007 & CP-15-CR-0000999-2007).
In other matters before the court, 3 DUI cases were adjudicated, with 1 defendant being granted acceptance into ARD relating to an incident in London Grove, and 2 others pleading guilty to DUI in cases that were initiated in West Chester. Another defendant facing DUI charges from an incident in Coatesville failed to appear in court; as a result, Judge Riley issued a bench warrant for Pedro Flores Vazquez, 31, of Coatesville.
The jury trial of Commonwealth vs. Thomas Moran Barrett (CP-15-CR-0002559-2006) commenced. In direct examination by Assistant District Attorney Michelle Frei, Trooper Jerry Cessna testified that, on the night of April 30, 2006, he was on patrol heading towards the borough when he was at the intersection of Strasburg Road and Hannum Avenue. Trooper Cessna testified that he was about to turn eastbound onto Hannum when he observed a red Volkswagen Jetta, driven by the defendant, heading westbound on Hannum towards Downingtown. Trooper Cessna then initiated a traffic stop on Downingtown Pike in East Bradford Township, citing an illegal window tint on the side and rear windows of Barrett's vehicle. He had also noted that Barrett was allegedly travelling at 50 mph in a 35 mph zone, however he ultimately was not cited for speeding.
During the course of the traffic stop, Trooper Cessna testified that a review of Barrett's driving record indicated that his license had been under suspension. Shortly thereafter, he had administered field sobriety tests to Barrett, as testified to later, had passed. The tests were administered after the trooper observed what he suspected was marijuana related debris on the floorboard of the car. During a pat down search of the defendant, Trooper Cessna stated that he found a small amount of marijuana in the pocket of the suspect's pants. At that point, Barrett was placed under arrest.
During an inventory search of the vehicle, Trooper Cessna testified that he had observed what he suspected was the barrel of a firearm protruding from underneath the driver's seat of the car. The gun, a Glock 9 mm semi-automatic firearm, was loaded, containing 7 bullets. Barrett claimed that he had legally purchased the gun while residing in Arizona, however admitted that he didn't have a valid permit to carry the gun in Pennsylvania. Barrett allegedly told the trooper that he had the gun in his car after shooting at a target range a couple of days earlier.
Continuing the search, Trooper Cessna testified that he found two small baggies containing suspected cocaine and a sandwich bag containing marijuana in the center console of the car.
During the interview, Trooper Cessna alleged that Barrett said that he was delivering the drugs from a suspect in West Chester to a friend in Downingtown, though the suspect didn't go into further detail. After a nearly 30 minute wait for the tow truck, Barrett was transported to Chester County Hospital for bloodwork related to a DUI investigation. The vehicle was then towed to the State Police barracks for processing. A couple days later, the interior and exterior of the vehicle was photographed using a Poloroid camera.
In cross examination by defense counsel Joseph P. Green, Jr., Trooper Cessna admitted that at the time of the traffic stop, his patrol car was not equipped with a dash-board video camera. Green then continued to hammer away at virtually all aspects of the Commonwealth's case, starting with the allegation of Barrett's license suspension. The defense then showed a letter from PennDOT indicating that Barrett's license has been restored apporximately a month prior to the traffic stop.
Green then addressed the battalion of tests administered by the trooper - or, more notably, the lack thereof. Under cross, Trooper Cessna admitted that Barrett's BAC was well below the legal limit and that he had passed the other field sobriety test that was administered. In the initial complaint filed with the court, the trooper alleged that he had detected a moderate odor of alcohol on Barrett's breath. The trooper then testified that at the time he had completed the sobriety tests, he was unaware of the presence of cocaine in the vehicle.
In regards to statements made while in custody, Green pointed out that while Barrett allegedly made statements alleging that he was delivering the drugs for a friend, Barrett made no such assertions in his written statement. Green presented his client's written statement to police, which read in part, "I am not a drug dealer. I do not sell drugs." It was a point that Green had repeated on more than one occasion.
Green also attacked the method of which the troopers processed the vehicle - both during the traffic stop and at the station - noting that it had not been processed until two days after the traffic stop and that there were no photographs taken of the vehicle at the time of the traffic stop. Trooper Cessna claimed that it was State Police policy that prevented a camera to be made available at the time of the traffic stop. Green also presented recent photographs that were taken of the vehicle at the Attorney General's impound lot in Harrisburg. The vehicle had been cleaned out between the time of processing and the day the photos were taken in Harrisburg, the trooper explained, in order to make the car's appearance acceptable once it was taken in for forfeiture proceedings.
It still didn't address Green's issues about the discovery of the drugs and the gun in the vehicle. The defense continued to claim that the discovery of said items were unlawful based on State Police policy. Green alleged that the officer, in fact, did not have probable cause to search the vehicle, given that the evidence appeared to inidcate that the officer didn't really have sufficient probable cause to search based solely on the DUI arrest. It should be noted that these issues were raised in a previous suppression hearing and that Judge Riley had sided with the Commonwealth.
After Trooper Cessna's testimony, court wrapped up for the day, with testimony from a second trooper on the scene and from the defendant expected. Deliberations could begin as early as this afternoon, depending on the pace of the rest of the trial.
From the sounds of it, the Commonwealth's case against Barrett as far as the DUI charges go are weak, at best. And, there seems to be quite a bit of doubt regarding the inventory search and subsequent discovery of the firearm and the drugs. If the Commonwealth is going to get a conviction on any of these charges, then to say they have their work cut out for them might be an understatment. And, the State Police's policy in certain areas, particularly the immediate availability of a camera as part of an inventory search or any other type of search, is starting to come back to bite the Commonwealth. From my personal standpoint, the Commonwealth should certainly be thankful that I'm not sitting on that jury...
In any case, the trial is scheduled to resume at 10:00 in Courtroom #6. Other trial matters are expected to be heard prior to the resumption of the jury trial...
No comments:
Post a Comment