Washington Twp. charged with DUI, pot possession |
Valley News Dispatch

Washington Twp. charged with DUI, pot possession

Brian C. Rittmeyer

A Washington Township man is facing a felony drug charge after state police say they found a “large bag” of marijuana in the trunk of his car.

State police said they stopped Austin David Bowman, 23, for a traffic violation on Allison Avenue in North Apollo on the evening of Sept. 20.

According to court records, the side and back windows of the vehicle Bowman was driving were “tinted to a degree which we could not see inside the vehicle.”

During the stop, police say they determined Bowman was impaired by marijuana and arrested him for driving under the influence.

“A probable cause search of the vehicle yielded a large plastic bag of marijuana from inside the trunk of the vehicle,” state police said in court records.

The amount of marijuana allegedly found was not specified in a news release or court records.

Bowman was charged with manufacture, delivery or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver; possession of a controlled substance; driving under the influence; and improper sunscreening for the window tint.

He was released from the Armstrong County Jail on Monday after posting a $5,000 bond.

A preliminary hearing before District Judge James Andring is scheduled for Nov. 7.

Brian Rittmeyer is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Brian at 724-226-4701, [email protected] or via Twitter @BCRittmeyer.

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.