Judge denies appeal of Jeannette man convicting of assaulting jail guards | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Judge denies appeal of Jeannette man convicting of assaulting jail guards

Rich Cholodofsky
1754119_web1_GavelNewN

The appeal of a Jeannette man’s conviction and sentence for assaults on guards at Westmoreland County Prison has been denied.

Derrick Deon Cobbs, 42, following a jury trial in 2012, was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault and was sentenced to serve 10 to 20 years in prison. The jury found Cobbs not guilty of an attempted murder charge.

Prosecutors contended Cobbs became enraged that green beans were mixed with pasta on his dinner plate as he awaited trial on a rape charge and put one guard in a choke hold during a melee that ensued.

In his appeal, Cobbs raised 16 different issues in which he claimed he was improperly represented during his trial and in subsequent appeals of his conviction and sentence. Among Cobb’s claims are allegations that he was not permitted to testify on his own behalf and that jurors did not see surveillance video of the full incident.

In a 15-page opinion filed Wednesday, Common Pleas Court Judge Christopher Feliciani said there was no evidence to support Cobbs’ claims.

In addition to his sentence for the jail guard assaults, Cobbs is also serving a 40-year prison sentence after he was convicted in 2014 for the rape of a Jeannette woman.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Rich at 724-830-6293, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.