A Uniontown police officer has been terminated following an internal investigation into a March traffic stop that officials determined lacked legal justification and escalated unnecessarily.
Officer Dylan Soisson, who was serving in a probationary role, was fired April 3 after Lake Township trustees voted unanimously to end his employment during a special meeting, according to township records.
The decision followed an administrative investigation into a March 22, 2026, traffic stop that prompted a formal citizen complaint alleging constitutional violations, excessive force and unlawful search and seizure.
Incident began with verbal insult
According to investigative records, Soisson initiated the stop after a passing driver yelled an insult — “F*** you pig” — while the officer was conducting another traffic stop.
Body camera video shows Soisson leaving the initial stop, entering his cruiser and pursuing the vehicle before initiating a traffic stop. No clear traffic violation is visible prior to the stop in the footage.
During the encounter, Soisson cited multiple reasons for the stop, including disorderly conduct and suspicious behavior, according to both the video and investigative summary.
The driver questioned the basis for the stop and appeared confused about why he had been pulled over.
Driver detained, vehicle searched
The situation escalated quickly.
Video shows the driver being ordered out of the vehicle, detained and placed in handcuffs. A search of the vehicle followed, during which a THC vape pen was discovered.
Soisson reported smelling burnt marijuana and referenced Ohio’s marijuana laws during the stop, according to investigative documents.
A second officer, identified as Officer Ed Beverage, arrived and was described in records as helping de-escalate the situation.
Ultimately, the driver was released without charges and given a verbal warning.
Complaint alleges constitutional violations
The driver filed a formal complaint the following day, alleging the stop was unlawful and retaliatory.
The complaint accused Soisson of:
- Conducting a stop without probable cause
- Retaliating against protected speech
- Using excessive force during detention
- Conducting an unlawful search of the vehicle
- Disrupting personal property during the encounter
The complaint specifically cited potential violations of the First and Fourth Amendments.
Investigation finds no probable cause
An internal investigation led by Sgt. John Koehler concluded that Soisson did not have sufficient legal grounds to initiate the stop.
The findings state the stop was largely based on the driver’s verbal insult, which is protected speech under the First Amendment.
Investigators also determined:
- No clear traffic violation justified the stop
- The justification for the stop shifted during the encounter
- The level of escalation was not supported by the circumstances
While Soisson believed he had cause to act, the investigation concluded his reasoning did not meet legal standards.
Leadership recommends discipline
Uniontown Police leadership reviewed the findings and agreed with the conclusions.
Captain Kevin Pierson wrote that the officer did not have probable cause to initiate the stop and that enforcement action was not justified based solely on the driver’s statement.
Pierson recommended disciplinary action “up to and including separation from employment.”
Police Chief Michael Batchik also supported the findings, noting the seriousness of the incident and the lack of lawful grounds for the stop.
Officer terminated during probation
Because Soisson was still in a probationary period, township trustees opted to terminate his employment immediately.
In a termination letter, Batchik stated Soisson had not demonstrated the ability to meet performance expectations required for the position.
The decision was made during an executive session of trustees, who cited personnel considerations and potential legal matters before voting to terminate Soisson.
Potential legal implications
The complainant indicated he may seek legal counsel, stating the alleged violations could exceed small claims thresholds.
The case highlights ongoing legal standards surrounding:
- First Amendment protections during police encounters
- Probable cause requirements for traffic stops
- Use of force and detention procedures
No charges filed
No criminal charges were filed against the driver stemming from the March 22 incident.
