Former Mon City pharmacy owner pleads guilty
The former owner of a Monongahela pharmacy pleaded guilty Thursday in federal court to criminal counts of conspiracy and conspiracy to launder money.
Jeffrey Markovitz, who previously owned Dierken's Pharmacy & Giftland at 100 E. Main Street, entered the guilty pleas in front of Judge Cathy Bissoon at the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in Pittsburgh.
Markovitz remains free on $10,000 unsecured bond, according to his attorney, Wayne DeLuca.
DeLuca said the sentencing date for Markovitz, originally scheduled for May 29, will be changed.
The conspiracy count included smuggling “misbranded” drugs and stated that Markovitz, twice in summer of 2007, wired $27,948 to Canada to buy “illegally smuggled, unapproved and misbranded prescription drugs”, according to court documents.
The document did not state if Markovitz sold the pills through the pharmacy or if others were involved. United States Attorney David J. Hickton, who prosecuted the case, did not return a phone message Thursday afternoon.
Officials from several federal agencies, including the FBI, Internal Revenue Service and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms had investigated Markovtiz's dealings at the pharmacy.
Internal Revenue Service Special Agent Cindy Pfeifer said Thursday she could not provide any other details about the investigation.
Rick Bruni Jr. is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at email@example.com or 724-684-2635.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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 â 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.