Jeannette man’s appeal of third-degree murder conviction rejected |

Jeannette man’s appeal of third-degree murder conviction rejected

Rich Cholodofsky

A Westmoreland County judge Monday rejected the appeal of a Jeannette man serving up to 18 years in prison for the 2016 third-degree murder of an armed man.

Common Pleas Court Judge Christopher Feliciani ruled there were no grounds to support the appeal filed by Jamere Ramone Glanton, who prosecutors said fired eight shots including multiple rounds that struck the head and face of 20-year-old Rashaad McCoy of Pittsburgh.

Glanton, who was 19 at the time of his arrest, pleaded guilty in March 2017 to a reduced count of murder. He was originally charged with first-degree murder, a crime that if convicted carries a mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Feliciani sentenced Glanton to serve 8 1/2-to 18 years in prison.

According to his appeal, Glanton claimed he did not want to plead guilty and instead wanted a jury to determine his case. Feliciani ruled there was no evidence to support that claim and that Glanton’s appeal was filed two years too late.

Glanton initially contended he shot McCoy in self defense inside a South Seventh Street apartment in Jeannette. Witnesses claimed McCoy was armed with an automatic rifle and waved the weapon after claiming he had been robbed of heroin.

Prosecutors said there was no evidence a robbery had been committed.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Rich at 724-830-6293, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.