ShareThis Page
Man arrested in Carnegie on drug charges |

Man arrested in Carnegie on drug charges

Matthew Guerry
| Thursday, January 17, 2019 11:20 a.m

An anonymous tip led to the arrest of a wanted man in Carnegie Jan. 16 on charges of felony drug possession. Rocco Vincent Colonello, of Valencia, had previously evaded police during a separate incident in Franklin Park, according to an incident report.

Carnegie police apprehended Colonello outside a residence at 131 Court Street. They found in his possession a small amount of suspected marijuana separated into three small baggies, and a bag containing 3.9 grams of methamphetamine and 7.6 grams of cocaine.

A search of a tote bag in Colonello’s possession turned up several smoking apparatuses and a digital scale, which the report states indicates an intent to distribute.

Colonello is being charged with one count of drug manufacturing and one count of possession with intent to deliver, both ungraded felonies that can carry sentences of 7-10 years in prison. He also faces several misdemeanor charges of drug and paraphernalia possession. Colonello was arraigned in Crafton before Magisterial District Judge Jack Kobistek the afternoon of Jan. 16. He was later transported to Pittsburgh to be brought up on charges related to the Franklin Park incident.

He is currently in the Allegheny County Jail on $50,000 straight bail.

Matthew Guerry is a Tribune-Review contributor.

Categories: Neighborhoods | Carlynton
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.