Rostraver man facing trial for 2 burglaries
A Rostraver Township man is facing trial on charges he burglarized two township homes.
Joshua James Steele, 31, of 103 Plainview Ave.,waived his right to a preliminary hearing for two separate counts of burglary and theft by unlawful taking.
Steele appeared Monday in front of Magisterial District Judge Charles Christner in West Newton.
Steele's charges stem from a pair of burglaries in September on Roberts Street and Allen Avenue.
Steele allegedly confessed to Rostraver Township police he stole a large amount of jewelry from the Roberts Street residence Sept. 1, according to the affidavit of probable cause.
He allegedly forced a window open to get inside after watching the owner leave, police said.
Jesse Wayne Boyd, 21, of Washington Township, allegedly admitted he sold the stolen jewelry for Steele at Cash For Gold in North Belle Vernon in exchange for drugs, the affidavit stated.
In the Allen Avenue case, a Winchester Model rifle and coins valued at more than $2,000 were stolen, according to police.
Boyd allegedly told police Steele used a crowbar to break in through a basement door, police said.
Police said Boyd then allegedly sold the coins Sept. 10 at Gem's Quick Cash in Belle Vernon.
On Sept. 23, Boyd waived his right to a preliminary hearing before Christner on two counts of receiving stolen property.
Both Steele and Boyd remain in the Westmoreland County Prison in lieu of $25,000 straight bond.
Rick Bruni Jr. is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org 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.