Share This Page

IUP student charged in $115,000 marijuana arrest

| Monday, May 5, 2014, 7:03 p.m.

A student at Indiana University of Pennsylvania is charged with drug offenses after police on Monday confiscated more than 20 pounds of marijuana with an estimated street value of $115,000.

Indiana Borough police arrested Aaron Andrew Paul Gmuca, 24, of Windber following an early-morning traffic stop.

An investigation uncovered a drug connection to New Jersey, police said.

Gmuca, an IUP senior, was charged with possession with intent to deliver, police said.

Police said several occupants in the car “appeared to be attempting to hide a package underneath the seat of the vehicle.” That package yielded a vacuum-sealed bag containing $15,000 in cash.

Further investigation uncovered additional cash and the drugs, police said.

Indiana police officer Thomas Dessell stopped the vehicle about 3 a.m.

Further investigation revealed the occupants — who were not identified by police — had just delivered a package to an Oak Street address. Police obtained a search warrant for the home and an additional warrant for a 2007 BMW at the home.

Inside the car, police said, was marijuana contained in 20 one-pound, vacuum-sealed bags.

A fourth warrant served on another vehicle leaving the home turned up a half-pound of marijuana, according to police.

Additional suspects are expected to be charged.

Gmuca was arraigned before District Judge Guy Haberl and jailed in the Indiana County Jail in lieu of posting $100,000 bail, online court records show.

He faces a preliminary hearing before Haberl.

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.