ShareThis Page

Judge drops bribery charge against ex-Apollo chief; other charges remain

| Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 12:31 a.m.
Former Apollo police Chief Paul Breznican.
Valley News Dispatch
Former Apollo police Chief Paul Breznican.

An Armstrong County judge dismissed a felony bribery charge in the theft case against former Apollo police Chief Paul Breznican but he still faces trial on 20 other charges.

Breznican's attorney in February filed a motion requesting the dismissal of all but three of the 21 charges filed against Breznican last summer by state police and the state attorney general's office. Attorney Duke George had claimed the prosecution had not met its burden of proof to justify the charges.

Breznican, 53, of Apollo is accused of improperly taking and selling guns, ammunition and other borough property while he was serving as police chief.

Apollo Council fired Breznican in November; he had been on suspension since June and previously was off duty due to an injury.

Judge James J. Panchik on Friday dismissed the bribery charge, indicating in his order that no evidence was presented to prove the gun sale relating to that charge occurred while Breznican was acting as police chief.

The attorney general's office alleges that in April 2006 Breznican took a .30-30 Winchester rifle and a shotgun from a friend, Mark Robinson, whose family had asked Breznican to check on.

Breznican allegedly told Robinson he could get the guns back at a later time.

But when Robinson inquired about the guns, Breznican allegedly told him the return would involve significant “red tape and paperwork” and instead offered Robinson $100 for the weapons, according to court testimony.

Panchik upheld four counts of theft and two counts of receiving stolen property that dealt with those two guns.

The judge wrote that the evidence presented so far indicated Breznican did not return the guns to Robinson, was deceptive regarding the so-called “red tape” involved in returning them and was coercive by using his status as police chief.

“However, we agree with (Breznican) that the .30-30 Winchester firearm and shotgun allegedly taken from Mr. Robinson were neither Apollo Borough property nor entrusted to it,” Panchik wrote. “There is no evidence that (Breznican) took these firearms in his official capacity. …”

Therefore, Panchik dismissed the bribery charge. He also amended two other charges — obstructing administration of law and misapplication of government property — to indicate they no longer applied in reference to the Robinson guns.

Because the latter two charges also involved other alleged gun and property sales, Breznican still is charged with those offenses.

In all, Breznican faces a total of 20 charges, including theft, receiving stolen property, misapplication of entrusted government property and obstructing administration of law.

Two counts are misdemeanors; the rest are felonies.

Six other charges — official oppression and five counts of misapplication of entrusted government property — were withdrawn during a preliminary hearing in October before Ford City District Judge J. Gary DeComo.

“When we filed (the motion to dismiss charges), there was no question in my mind … that a lot of these charges lodged against Chief Breznican really didn't have any merit at all,” said Duke George, who took over as Breznican's attorney in August after Breznican parted ways with previous attorney Greg Swank.

George said he was pleased Panchik ruled in Breznican's favor on some of the counts. George estimated that his client's trial will occur within one to two months.

“It's now up to a jury to decide whether he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” George said. “I think we have a valid defense on most of the charges.”

“We have received the judge's order, and we have it under review,” said Dennis Fisher, a spokesman for the attorney general's office.

Liz Hayes is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 724-226-4680 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.