Hearing rescheduled for man charged in Plum shooting | TribLIVE.com

Hearing rescheduled for man charged in Plum shooting

Dillon Carr
Malik Hawkins

A Pittsburgh man who allegedly shot another man in his Plum house will have to wait for his day in court.

The attorney for Malik Hawkins, 21, requested to postpone a preliminary hearing scheduled for Jan. 23 at Plum’s Magisterial District Court.

Police said Malik Hawkins, 21, of Pittsburgh, walked into Charles Sleasman Jr.’s house on Saltsburg Road and shot him in the legs after the two wrestled for control of a hand gun.

Sleasman, 22, was treated for his wounds at a local hospital.

“Sleasman stated that he heard approximately three gun shots and felt a severe pain in his legs. He then fell to the ground as Malik ran out of the front door,” said the criminal complaint filed against Hawkins.

Sleasman said he knew Hawkins as an acquaintance in the criminal complaint and that Hawkins had assaulted him “last summer.”

Hawkins was identified by Sleasman after police showed him eight photos of suspects, said the criminal complaint.

A preliminary hearing has been scheduled for 9 a.m. on Feb. 6. Hawkins was being held in the Allegheny County Jail in Pittsburgh without bail on charges of attempted homicide, aggravated assault, burglary, weapons violations and recklessly endangering another person.

Dillon Carr is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Dillon at 412-871-2325, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Plum
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.