SHERIFFS' ROLE IN DRUG PROBES IS FOCUS OF STATEWIDE DISPUTE

By Michael Sandler
INQUIRER SUBURBAN STAFF

To many, a sheriff symbolizes order, a solitary figure slinging a sidearm
behind the star of the law.

For the last year, the sheriffs of Pennsylvania have found themselves
locked in another showdown, but the parties thwarting them from the other
end of the proverbial dusty road are not lawbreakers. They are two other
enforcers of the law: the state police and the National Guard.

The debate is over whether sheriffs, elected county officials who are
charged with "maintaining the peace," have the authority to investigate
drug crimes.

State police say that sheriffs lack proper training to investigate drug
crimes and that their sole responsibility is to secure courthouses and
assist other branches of law enforcement when requested. A group that
represents the sheriffs says common law permits them to be involved in drug
probes.

"Sheriffs are not looking to replace the state police," said Thomas King,
an attorney representing the Pennsylvania Sheriffs' Association. " . . . In
some counties, the sheriffs are it. To suddenly limit their ability to work
hand in hand with the National Guard to combat crime -- it does not make
sense, especially with the war on drugs."

The Sheriffs' Association plans to meet with state Attorney General Mike
Fisher on Sept. 16 to discuss the issue.

At stake is more than just the role the state's 67 sheriffs and their more
than 1,500 deputies can play in drug interdiction. The sheriffs' group says
the fight might have serious implications for law enforcement.

The issue has come to the fore because of a series of incidents, including
one last summer in Perry County, near Harrisburg. Sheriff George
Frownfelter said he was denied use of a National Guard helicopter to fly
over an area where he suspected marijuana was growing.

"It is impossible -- I can't say impossible -- but close to impossible to
do it on foot," Frownfelter said. "The man-hours expended would be
tremendous; the chances of finding anything would be slim."

Frownfelter, who said he is often the only law officer between densely
populated boroughs interspersed in 500 square miles of mountainous terrain,
said he and his deputies had participated in several drug investigations,
from planning to raiding.

Lt. Col. Christopher Cleaver, a spokesman for the Pennsylvania National
Guard, said the sheriff's request was denied because he was acting alone
and not as part of a task force. He said that order comes from the state
police.

"We would not make that determination," Cleaver said. "Someone else would,
and we would follow their lead."

Frownfelter said he learned of the decision in a letter he received last
Aug. 6 that said only, "Pursuant to decision of[Pennsylvania State
Police]General Counsel Barbara Christie this request is disapproved."

"I was frankly at a loss for what basis they were asking to do drug
investigations," Christie said in an interview. "They were interested in
doing this themselves, instead of as ancillary or auxiliary police."

A few months before the Perry County request, sheriffs tried to enroll in a
marijuana eradication course sponsored by the state police and the National
Guard, and were denied after Capt. David Connon, of the state police Bureau
of Drug Law Enforcement, sought Christie's advice.

"Neither sheriffs, their deputies, nor probation and parole officers should
be engaging in marijuana eradication operations," Christie wrote in a memo
to Connon dated June 1, 1998. "Sheriffs' and their deputies' principal
function is as an arm of the court. . . . Recent case law has opined that
sheriffs and deputy sheriffs are not police officers. . . . "