Commonwealth v. Curtis Diego:

The District Attorney’s Office is appealing a court's order suppressing evidence to the Pennsylvania Superior Court following a recent ruling.

On February 21, 2013, Curtis Diego arranged to sell heroin to a police informant. With police supervision, the informant utilized his Ipad to communicate with the Defendant to arrange the heroin purchase. Police arrived at the proposed meet location in Swatara Township prior to completion of the sale in order to arrest Diego. The Defendant attempted to flee from police in his vehicle before being apprehended. He was found in possession of four bundles, or 46 packets, of heroin. Curtis Diego is charged with Possession with Intent to Deliver a Controlled Substance, Fleeing or Eluding Police, Tampering with Evidence, and Unlawful Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.

The Defendant filed a Motion to Suppress Evidence claiming that the police unlawfully intercepted his communications with the informant in violation of the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act. A suppression hearing was held earlier this year, and afterwards both the Commonwealth and Defense filed briefs in support of their positions. Judge Scott A. Evans granted the Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence. The Dauphin County District Attorney’s Office is currently appealing that ruling to the Pennsylvania Superior Court. The case is being prosecuted by Deputy District Attorney Brian Hokamp.