ShareThis Page
New Ken police say they found 148 heroin stamp bags on wanted man |
Valley News Dispatch

New Ken police say they found 148 heroin stamp bags on wanted man

Matthew Medsger
| Thursday, August 23, 2018 4:15 p.m

A New Kensington man will head to court after police say an active warrant led to his arrest and the discovery of almost 150 packets of heroin.

Anthony Joel Hughley, 28, of Victoria Avenue, is charged with a felony count of possession with intent to distribute and related charges.

Hughley waived his right to a preliminary hearing on those charges Thursday before District Judge Frank J. Pallone Jr. in New Kensington.

State Trooper Glenn Adams wrote in court documents that he and New Kensington Detective Sgt. Sam Long were working undercover the evening of June 21 when Long spotted Hughley on foot. According to Adams, Long knew Hughley and that he was wanted by the state Board of Probation and Parole.

When Adams took Hughley into custody on the warrant, according to court documents, 148 small plastic bags filled with what officers suspect is heroin were found on his person.

Hughley was taken to the Westmoreland County Prison in lieu of a $50,000 bond. He is scheduled for formal arraignment Nov. 20 before Westmoreland County Judge Rita D. Hathaway in Greensburg.

Matthew Medsger is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Matthew at 724-226-4675, or via Twitter @matthew_medsger.

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.