HARRISBURG — Pennsylvania's illegal-drug law does not permit sheriff's deputies to investigate crimes that occur outside their presence, the state Supreme Court said in the latest of a series of rulings delineating their powers.

The 4-2 decision granted a request by the defendant in a Bradford County methamphetamine investigation that items seized in a 2003 search should not be used against him.

Justice Max Baer wrote that the majority opinion should not "be read to suggest that the General Assembly lacks authority to grant broader investigatory powers to sheriffs."

The case had been closely watched by sheriffs and deputies, particularly those in smaller counties and rural areas who often perform duties beyond courthouse security, prisoner transport and service of legal papers.

"I'm afraid it's going to be interpreted that they can't do anything outside of the narrowly defined, traditional sheriff duties," said Jim Hazen, executive director of the Pennsylvania Sheriffs' Association. He urged the Legislature to act in response.

Deputies who went to a home near Troy in July 2003 seeking to question a woman in a drug investigation detected a chemical smell coming from a barn. They approached Cory J. Dobbins, who escaped on foot, and then came across items used to manufacture meth before obtaining a search warrant.

Dobbins, 32, was arrested more than a week later in Elmira, N.Y., and was subsequently convicted of related offenses. He is serving a state prison sentence of 4 to 23 years.

Dobbins' attorney, Robert Fleury, said he expects the charges to be dismissed now because the case hinged entirely on the evidence obtained in the search.

"The sheriff's a good friend, and I can see the argument going the other way too, especially in drug cases," Fleury said Wednesday. "It really wouldn't bother me if he had the authority to do so, but it's really not what the law says."

The Supreme Court's decision, issued Tuesday, overturned a Superior Court ruling.

A dissenting opinion by Justice J. Michael Eakin said the deputies' legal authority to investigate drug crimes was not relevant to Dobbins' case.

"It does not matter whether they came for a quiet stroll, to distribute religious tracts or to investigate the Lindbergh kidnapping," Eakin wrote.