Attorneys are looking into whether the speedy trial rights of a woman accused of shooting her boyfriend in Penn Township were violated.
Defense attorney Ken Noga argued Monday that he believes Leah H. Gillis, 34, of North Braddock has been held at the Westmoreland County Prison for 181 days.
“We’re right on the line, judge,” he said.
Under what is known as Rule 600, prosecutors are required by state law to bring a case to trial within six months, or 180 days, for suspects who are in jail and within a year for those who are not in custody. Time limits typically are adjusted throughout the course of a prosecution to account for attorney delays and administrative issues that result in postponements of trials.
Judge Scott Mears ordered attorneys to examine a transcript from a March hearing to determine what was discussed and how the case was handled.
Gillis was arrested Aug. 2 and has been held at the Westmoreland County Prison on charges of attempted homicide and related offenses.
She is accused of shooting the man about 2:20 a.m. at an Ader Road house. Police said the pair had been staying at the home with its owner for several weeks. Gillis told investigators they were arguing when she retrieved a shotgun because she felt threatened, but that she intended only to scare him, according to court papers. The man was shot in the shoulder.
Mears said there were no defense continuances in the case until December. Then in March, the case was put on the May trial list, which has since been continued until July. Noga’s firm entered its appearance in the case in April.
Attorneys planned to reconvene in the next couple of weeks to address the speedy trial issue.
Mears said he intended to keep Gillis’ bail set at $125,000 because he felt it was reasonable given the case’s allegations. She initially was denied bail but, two weeks after her arrest, a $200,000 bail was set. It was reduced in October, according to court records.
Judge Timothy Krieger last month dismissed a 2021 drunken-driving case against a Ligonier man after ruling that prosecutors violated the defendant’s speedy trial rights. The defendant was not incarcerated in that case. The judge noted that two previous cases, one in 2018 and another in 2021, were dismissed because of speedy trial rights violations.
