Fayette Co. man should be freed, not tried again for killing, attorney argues
A Fayette County man who admitted to stabbing and killing a waitress in 1987 should be let out of prison and not face a new trial because his conviction was overturned due to prosecutorial misconduct, the man's attorney argues in his latest appeal.
A Fayette County jury in 1988 convicted Mark David Breakiron, 52, formerly of Hopwood, of the homicide and robbery of Saundra Marie Martin, 24.
Breakiron's defense was that his assault and theft weren't premeditated.
U.S. District Judge Nora Barry Fischer overturned his conviction and death sentence in 2011 after finding that prosecutors withheld evidence that would have cast doubt on a jailhouse snitch's testimony.
Breakiron lost state appeals claiming the county couldn't retry him due to double jeopardy. The state Supreme Court in February refused to hear his appeal.
His federal appeal filed Friday argues that U.S. Magistrate Judge Robert B. Mitchell should block the new trial and order Breakiron's release because of the prosecution's “pervasive pattern of misconduct,” according to documents filed by Samuel J.B. Angell, a federal public defender.
Martin was working at Shenanigan's Lounge in German Township to pay for dental hygienist classes.
She was closing the business for the night on March 24, 1987, when Breakiron attacked her, took her purse and the bar's receipts and drove her to his grandparents' house in South Union, where he tortured and killed her, according to police.
Police found her body in a stream near the grandparents' home, blood stains in the bed of his pickup truck and a hunting knife under the front seat.
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.