3 waive hearings in Charleroi gun thefts
Three Charleroi residents accused of conspiring to steal several rifles from a neighbor for drug money appeared in court Monday.
Nicole Pelzer and brothers Ryan and Matthew Robison each agreed to waive their rights to preliminary hearings before Magisterial District Judge Larry Hopkins in Charleroi.
Pelzer, 29, of 615A Meadow Ave., was charged with five counts each of theft by unlawful taking, criminal conspiracy and receiving stolen property, according to the affidavit of probable cause filed by Charleroi Regional Police Lt. Eric Porter.
Ryan Robison, 30, and Matthew Robison, 26, both of 121 Fallowfield Ave., are both charged with two counts each of receiving stolen property and criminal conspiracy.
They are accused of scheming to steal five rifles from Louise Davis' residence on several occasions from Oct. 26 to 30.
Pelzer allegedly confessed during a Nov. 26 police interview to stealing the rifles and selling them to various gun shops in the Mon Valley with the Robisons, according to the affidavit. Pelzer lived next to the Davises and stayed with them briefly, police said.
Hopkins agreed to a request by Washington County Assistant District Attorney Joseph Zupancic and Pelzer and Matthew Robison's attorney's to lower their bonds from $75,000 to $10,000.
Hopkins increased Ryan Robison's bond from $5,000 to $10,000.
All three are still in the Washington County Correctional Facility.
In a separate case, Ryan Robison waived his right to a preliminary hearing on a Dec. 11 charge of use/possession of drug paraphernalia in Charleroi.
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.