Vandergrift pair arrested on drug charges
By Brian C. Rittmeyer
Published: Thursday, July 22, 2010,
Leechburg police arrested two Vandergrift men after finding 99 packets of heroin in their car during a traffic stop Wednesday.
Arrested were the driver, Stephen Mark Stedrak, 25, of Longfellow Street, and a passenger, Robert Aaron Wolfe, 29, of Franklin Avenue.
According to arrest papers, officers stopped the car after Stedrake was seen turning right from the IGA parking lot onto Route 66 without using a turn signal. The left rear taillight of the car was broken, police said.
An officer said he knew Stedrak's drivers license had been suspended and that there was a warrant for his arrest because he had not paid a fine for running a traffic light Jan. 22.
Because Stedrak could not drive the car away, police checked Wolfe's license and found his also was suspended.
Stedrak told police a knife was in a cup holder in the center console of the vehicle. Police say an officer grabbed the cup holder to remove the knife, revealing a plastic bag containing several bundles of heroin.
The bag contained 99 packets marked "Grease Gurilla," separated into 10 bundles.
The heroin could have a street value of as much as $1,500.
A small bag of marijuana was found next to the heroin, according to police.
Police frisked Wolfe and allegedly found a quantity of crack cocaine greater than for personal use in a cigarette box in his pants pocket, along with a syringe.
Stedrak was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to deliver, related drug charges, driving with a suspended license and traffic offenses.
Wolfe was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver and a related charged.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.