Hogan wants trooper suit dismissed

Because he no longer works for the Pennsylvania State Police, the man at the center of a lawsuit file against Chester County District Attorney Thomas P. Hogan over his inclusion on a “do not call” lost cannot claim he will suffer any injury, according to a petition to dismiss the case.

“The entire case has become moot,” attorneys for Hogan wrote in the motion to dismiss filed last week in Common Pleas Court.

Former Lt. Brandon Daniels retired from the state police earlier this month and began working as the chief of police for the Owen

J. Roberts School District. He announced his retirement in June, the motion filed by attorneys Michael Pullano and John Borelli of the Philadelphia firm of Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney of Philadelphia, states.

That came before Hogan wrote a memo to law enforcement authorities about Daniel’s actions in he investigation of an officer-involved shooting in southern Chester County

in which he announced that Daniels had been placed on the list of officers the DAs Office would not call to testify in criminal cases. Hogan maintains that Daniels failed to follow his office’s direction that such cases be investigated by an independent law enforcement agency, that being the Chester County Detectives.

His retirement from the state police related hiring by the school district means that Daniels “does not have a legitimate basis to file the (lawsuit) as there is no injury to Daniels,” the motion states. It asks Judge Edward Griffith, to whom the

case has been assigned, to dismiss the complaint.

Hogan also asserts that the Pennsylvania State Troopers Association, the union representing the state troopers assigned to the two state police barracks in the county, has no standing in the case. None of its members other than Daniels and two other former troopers, are on the “do not call list.”

“Without the involvement of Daniels, the (union) lacks standing to bring this matter as (it) is unable to identify any of its members who face ‘an immediate or threatened injury,’ “the motion

states. The claims that the way the DAs Office uses its “do not call” list might injure a trooper’s reputation are “speculative and based on a hypothetical fear,” and not on any evidence of actual harm to anyone’s career or standing in the public eye, the attorneys said.

A spokesman for the troopers’ union, David LaTorre, declined comment Friday, “out of respect for the legal process.”

The union and Daniels, who are represented by Harrisburg attorney Sean Welby, now have 20 days to respond to Hogan’s motion to dismiss. Griffith would

then likely issue an order sometime afterwards either upholding Hogan’s requst or allowing the suit to proceed. The union and Daniels are not seeking monetary damages.

The lawsuit has had the unintended consequences of bringing to light not only the dispute between Daniels and Hogan over the shooting but also the existence of a “no call list” kept by the county DAs Office. The latter came as news to defense attorneys practicing in the county, many said.

Hogan disclosed the list’s existence in a 16-page memo to the acting commissioner of the state police, Lt. Col. Robert Evanchick; the commander of the PSP Troop J, Capt. James Fisher; and the state director of Homeland Security, Marcus L. Brown, that was highly critical of the state police’s handling of the May shooting involving a suspected drunk driver who tried to flee from state police in London Grove.

Such lists are kept by some law enforcement agencies as a way to protect against tainted testimony being given in court by police whose credibility has been called into dispute. Hogan, a former Assistant U.S. Attorney, refers to them as “Giglio” lists — after the federal case that established that a witness’s presence on a “do not call” list must be made known to defendants — and notes that they have been used by the U.S Department of Justice “for decades.”

Lawrence Hamelin, a longtime West Chester criminal defense attorney, said Friday that the fact that such a list is being kept by the D.A.’s Office came a surprise. Because there is no way of knowing how many county police officers are on the list and what their identities are, Harmelin said he would consider challenging cases based on whether an arrested officer had been placed on he list.

“I am wondering whether its appropriate now in every case involving a seizure, a suppression, or a traffic stop, to ask whether an officer is on a “do-not-call” list,” he said.

In his memo, Hogan identified only Daniels, and former Troopers Jose LeBron and John Sromovsky, both of whom were convicted of criminal offenses, as being the only state troopers included on the list. He did not specify how many police officers are on the list, except to note that being blackballed in this way, “happens very infrequently in Chester County.”

Daniels and the troopers union filed suit against Hogan in September asking the court to direct Hogan to allow any troopers whose names were set to go on the list an opportunity to present reasons why that action should not be taken. The suit said not doing so deprive them of their constitutional rights.

In his motion to dismiss, Hogan argued that he, as D.A., had an absolute right to not only keep the list but to decide who would be included. There are extremely limited avenues for people to take in suing an elected official such as a D.A., he said, especially when they are acting in their official capacity.

Hogan’s displeasure with Daniels, and his dispute with the state police, arose over his decision to order all police agencies in the county to comply with his offices’ policy involving officer involved shooting. The policy requires all departments to notify the District Attorney immediately, and to hand over reigns of an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the shooting to the county detectives.

He said that regarding the May shooting involving the suspected drunk driver, Daniels failed to comply. He did not notify anyone in the D.A.’s Office until four hours after the shooting took place, even though he contacted numerous state police officials.

Hogan stated that when he confronted Daniels as to why he had not complied with the shooting policy, the veteran trooper said initially that he was too busy to do so. Later, he added that he did not have Hogan’s direct telephone number.

“Lt. Brandon Daniels willfully subverted the DAO Policy for officer-involved shootings,” Hogan’s memo stated, using the acronym for the District Attorney’s Office. “Daniels also made statements to the District Attorney that were not credible, contradicted by established facts or other troopers.

“As a result, Lt. Daniels has been placed on the DAO ‘do not use’ list. He will not be called to testify for the Commonwealth in any criminal cases in Chester County,” Hogan wrote.

It is this inclusion that is the subject of the troopers’ association’s lawsuit. It contends that Daniels was never given an opportunity to state his case before being blackballed in this way, which the complaint contends is a damage to his reputation. Hogan did not provide him with advanced notice of his decision, the suit states.

“It appears that there is no mechanism by which Hogan, as District Attorney of Chester County, provides advanced notice or opportunity for hearing, for any member of the Pennsylvania State Police before being placed on the ‘do not use’ list,” the complaint states. “Nor are there any apparent standards for being placed on the list other than the arbitrary and capricious whim of District Attorney Hogan.” To contact staff writer Michael P. Rellahan, call 610-696-1544.

Tom Hogan