Share This Page

Greensburg man gets up to 20 years for armed robbery of Hempfield business

| Thursday, Oct. 4, 2012, 12:01 a.m.

A Greensburg man was sentenced to serve up to 20 years in prison for the armed robbery of a Hempfield business more than two years ago.

Evan Lamont Hughes, 30, pleaded guilty Wednesday to a robbery charge for his role in the Jan. 18, 2010, heist at the Norwin Messenger Service along Route 30.

According to police, Hughes and another man entered the business with a .45-caliber handgun, ordered employees to lie on the floor and demanded money. The men left with more than $8,000 in checks and money orders, police said.

Hughes was arrested several weeks later after he was identified to police by his partner, who implicated him in the robbery.

In court on Wednesday, Hughes also pleaded guilty to three unrelated cases in which he was accused of selling Ecstasy and other drugs, illegal possession of guns, and drunken driving.

Pezze imposed a series of concurrent sentences that totaled 10 to 20 years in prison.

“I hope you recognize that you have children and you are not setting a good example for them,” Pezze said.

Hughes is the second man to be sent to prison for the Norwin Messenger Service robbery.

In July, Gino M. Conti, 33, of Greensburg pleaded guilty for his role in the holdup and was sentenced by Pezze to 10 to 20 years in prison.

Charges against Heather L. Beckwith, 28, of Greensburg, are still pending. Prosecutors believe Beckwith worked at the Hempfield business and provided information to Conti about where the money was kept.

Also in July, Conti received an additional sentence of 18 to 46 months in prison for causing a car crash on March 5, 2009, in Hempfield that seriously injured two motorists.

Rich Cholodofsky is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 724-830-6293 or rcholodofsky@tribweb.com.

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 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.