ShareThis Page
Kittanning woman drops state Supreme Court appeal regarding charity restitution | TribLIVE.com
Valley News Dispatch

Kittanning woman drops state Supreme Court appeal regarding charity restitution

Chuck Biedka
812351_web1_vnd-steffeyappeal-022519

A woman whose appeal was accepted for review by the state Supreme Court on Wednesday has changed her mind and asked her attorney to drop the appeal of her paying restitution to three Armstrong County charities.

Beverly Kaye Steffey, 65, of Kittanning, has “decided that she does not want the case to proceed, and has asked that her appeal be withdrawn, despite the fact that this would expose her to severe sanctions should she become unable to continue to pay back these community groups,” her attorney, Chuck Pascal, of Leechburg, told the Tribune-Review.

Attempts to reach Steffey by phone and Facebook on Wednesday night were unsuccessful.

In 2017, Steffey, a bookkeeper, pleaded guilty to theft and forgery. She was ordered to repay about $129,000 restitution to the Progressive Workshop, about $83,000 to Allegheny Valley Land Trust and about $6,000 to the Armstrong County Conservancy.

In a story published Wednesday by the Tribune-Review, the state Supreme Court announced that it had agreed to hear Steffey’s appeal that she has to pay the restitution.

But at about 7 p.m., Pascal called the newspaper to say Steffey had decided to end her appeal.

“Ms. Steffey has decided that she does not want the case to proceed, and has asked that her appeal be withdrawn, despite the fact that this would expose her to severe sanctions should she become unable to continue to pay back these community groups,” Pascal said.

Steffey has “always intended to do her best to pay back as much of the losses as possible to the Progressive Workshop, Allegheny Valley Land Trust and the Armstrong County Conservancy and would do so even without an order from the court requiring her to do so,” her attorney said.

Pascal said “She wants to do what is right” and has consistently made payments toward restitution since her release from jail.

“The legal issue involved here, however, is that the court’s order of restitution exposes her to criminal penalties should she, at some time, become unable to continue to make payments,” Pascal said.

“This has been misunderstood by many in the community, and the perception that she is attempting to not pay back these groups, although false, but has made it difficult for her to find employment.”

He said the case would have dealt with an important legal question that could have impacted many cases across the state.

But, Pascal concluded, “the important thing to me is that Ms. Steffey be able to overcome this misconception in the community about her intentions, rebuild her reputation and find employment, in this, a community which she loves and which is her home.”

Armstrong County District Attorney Katie Charlton, who expressed concerns about the situation previously, did not return a call for comment made after Steffey changed her mind.

Chuck Biedka is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Chuck at 724-226-4711, [email protected] or via Twitter .

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.