Quantcast

Pa. State Trooper says his shooting of man near street race is protected by sovereign immunity

PENNSYLVANIA RECORD

Monday, December 23, 2024

Pa. State Trooper says his shooting of man near street race is protected by sovereign immunity

Federal Court
Sarinamkaplan

Kaplan | LinkedIn

PHILADELPHIA – A Pennsylvania State Trooper who shot and killed an 18-year-old man near a street race on Interstate 95 in Philadelphia last year has argued that actions were “objectively reasonable under the circumstances” and protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.

Anthony Allegrini Sr. & Jennifer Allegrini (as the Administrators of the Estate of Anthony Allegrini Jr.) of Glen Mills, Giovanni Patete and Vincent Tribuiani of Prospect Park and William Soper of Norwood first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on March 15 versus Pennsylvania State Trooper Robert Sobeck Jr., Unknown Pennsylvania State Troopers of Troop K and Unknown Philadelphia Police Officers, all of Philadelphia.

“On or about June 4, 2023, at approximately 3:30 a.m. on 1-95 South at Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Allegrini was operating his vehicle with Patete, Tribuiani and Soper riding as passengers, when Allegrini pulled his vehicle onto the left shoulder of the road to watch vehicles in the Northbound lanes of I-95 perform ‘tricks’ with their vehicles. After Allegrini pulled his vehicle on the shoulder, Allegrini, Patete, Tribuiani and Soper exited their vehicle and watched the Northbound I-95 cars perform the car ‘tricks,” the suit said.

“After several minutes of watching the cars, plaintiffs proceeded to walk back to their vehicle to leave the area. As plaintiffs got into their vehicle, defendant Sobeck pulled his state trooper vehicle in front of Allegrini’s vehicle and exited. Seconds later, additional state troopers and police officers pulled their vehicles to the area and also exited their vehicles. At no time were any of the plaintiffs armed with any weapons.”

The suit added that “within seconds of stopping his state trooper vehicle, Sobeck, without any probable cause, withdrew his weapon, climbed on top of the front end of Allegrini’s vehicle and then fired a single shot from his weapon directly through the front windshield, striking Allegrini in the chest while he was sitting in the driver's seat of his vehicle.”

“After shooting Allegrini, Sobeck brandished his weapon and shouted at Allegrini, Patete, Tribuiani and Soper to ‘get the f–k out’ of the vehicle. When Patete, Tribuiani and Soper emerged from their vehicle, fearing for their physical safety, Sobeck ordered them to ‘get the f–k on the ground’, which they did. Allegrini, while suffering a gunshot wound to his chest and bleeding profusely, also attempted to follow Sobeck’s order to ‘get the f–k out’ of the vehicle, but as he opened his door, he collapsed to the ground. At no time did defendants Sobeck, state troopers or police officers render any medical assistance to Allegrini as he was visibly bleeding profusely on the ground,” the suit stated.

“Allegrini, while on the ground bleeding from a lethal gunshot, shouted numerous times directly to Sobeck, state troopers and police officers for ‘help’, but none of the defendants responded by providing necessary medical assistance. After remaining on the ground for several minutes, Patete, Soper and Tribuiani were ordered to sit on the side of the road. Shortly thereafter, Patete walked away from the scene. Subsequently, Soper and Tribuiani were handcuffed by Sobeck and state troopers. During this time, Sobeck continued to have his gun drawn and pointed, threating to shoot his weapon at other people who had also pulled over to watch the Northbound I-95 vehicles.”

The suit continued that “while Tribuiani and Soper were handcuffed on the side of the road, they observed Allegrini bleeding to death and screaming for help, Tribuiani and Soper pleaded for Sobeck, state troopers and police officers to help Allegrini.”

“Sobeck, state troopers and police officers knew that Philadelphia Fire Department Medics arrived on the scene to help Allegrini, but defendants prevented said medics from getting to Allegrini, by purposely holding back Fire Department personnel from the scene for a significant time period after Allegrini was initially shot by Sobeck. As a result of preventing Fire Department medics from treating Allegrini, Sobeck, state troopers and police officers deliberately allowed Allegrini to bleed to death,” the suit said.

“After illegally handcuffing plaintiffs Tribuiani and Soper without warning or justification, state troopers took Tribuiani and Soper to the Troop K State Police Barracks, where they were questioned and remained for multiple hours until released. When Philadelphia Fire Department medics were finally allowed to treat Allegrini, they found that he was ‘dead at the scene.”

On May 7, Sobeck’s counsel filed a motion to stay the instant civil case, until the related investigation into the incident being conducted by the Philadelphia District Attorney’s Office concludes, arguing that “a stay would benefit the public by allowing the District Attorney’s Office to conduct a complete, unimpeded criminal investigation.”

However, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Judge Nitza I. Quiñones Alejandro denied the stay motion on May 17, and further ordered defendant Sobeck to answer the suit by June 14.

UPDATE

On June 14, Sobeck and his counsel answered the suit – denying its substantive claims and only admitting that the officer “discharged his weapon one time during the course of duty as a Pennsylvania State Police officer, striking plaintiff-decedent.”

In new matter affirmative defenses, Sobeck argued his actions were protected by sovereign immunity.

“The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of qualified immunity. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of sovereign immunity. Answering defendant’s actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances and in all respects consistent with the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments,” the defenses stated.

“Any use of force by answering defendant was permitted by law. Answering defendant was, at all times, acting within the course and scope of his employment with the Pennsylvania State Police. Answering defendant did not engage in willful and wanton conduct that would give rise to an award of punitive damages.”

For counts of excessive force, false detention and false arrest under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, denial of medical attention, survival and wrongful death, the plaintiffs are seeking, individually and jointly, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit totaling $50 million.

The plaintiffs are represented by Joseph S. Oxman of Oxman Goodstadt Kuritz, in Philadelphia.

Defendant Sobeck is represented by Sarina M. Kaplan of the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office, in Harrisburg.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:24-cv-01139

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com

More News