Citing a lack of evidence and prosecutorial misconduct, a Butler County man sentenced to prison for pointing a semi-automatic rifle at police during a 2017 incident at his home is seeking to have his conviction vacated.

Al Lindsay, attorney for Richard W. Gniewkowski, argued Monday in Butler County Court that prosecutors failed at trial to prove his client did not act in self-defense.

Additionally, he claimed county Assistant District Attorney Ben Simon went out of legal bounds when he branded the defendant's testimony as lies in his closing argument.

But Simon countered that the jury's mixed verdict in part proved Gniewkowski was given a fair trial.

Judge William Shaffer said he would rule on the defense motion later.

Shaffer on May 23 sentenced Gniewkowski to 21 to 42 months in state prison after jurors convicted him of felony aggravated assault, misdemeanor simple assault and two counts of recklessly endangering another person, following a one-day jury trial in December.

The jury also acquitted him on additional counts of aggravated assault and simple assault.

State police arrested Gniewkowski after a brief standoff with troopers April 9, 2017, at his then-home on Stargrille Road in Winfield Township.

Police said they went to the house in response to a burglar alarm. They got no answer after knocking on the door of the unlit home and identifying themselves as police.

But when they went to the back door, they noticed Gniewkowski armed with what was described as an “assault rifle,” which he then pointed at the troopers, according to testimony.

Police said the officers, in turn, drew their service pistols and yelled at the defendant to put down the rifle, while again identifying themselves as law enforcement.

Gniewkowski responded with an expletive and kept the rifle pointed in the direction of the troopers, who retreated, taking up position around the house, police said.

A trooper eventually activated the police cruiser's emergency lights and siren, and deployed the vehicle's public address system to convince the suspect to surrender.

Gniewkowski came out of the house, hands up, and was handcuffed. No shots were fired and no injuries were reported, police said.

Police said Gniewkowski was found to be “extremely impaired.”

Inside the home, police said they found an AR-15 rifle, which was loaded with a magazine and had a round in the chamber.

Gniewkowski, who took the stand in his own defense, told the jury that he was half asleep at the time of the incident and under medication when he went outside to see who was pounding on his door.

He characterized the incident as a misunderstanding, as he was fearful for his life from a previous unrelated threat.

He said when police activated their lights, he was relieved to see them.

Lindsay at Monday's hearing contended that the prosecution at trial failed to present sufficient evidence to undercut his claim that Gniewkowski acted in self-defense that night.

In Pennsylvania, self-defense is an affirmative defense, which means that once the defendant raises that defense, the burden of proof shifts to the state to disprove it.

“To say you're a man in your own home and you don't know who's banging on your door in the middle of the night and you're waking up and you have a gun in your own home that you don't discharge, and you wind up in the penitentiary,” he said, “I'm saying that's a profound injustice.”

Simon, however, defended the verdict, pointing out that by installing an alarm system at his house, Gniewkowski was “inviting police” there in the event it went off.

And he said police made sure that the defendant knew they were at his home that night.

“I don't see where their (self-defense) argument can fly,” Simon said, “that he has the right to point a loaded AR-15 in their face after they just identified themselves and illuminated themselves.”

Lindsay also claimed the court erred in failing to order a mistrial after Simon, in his closing argument, told the jury that Gniewkowski “lied to you.”

That assertion, Lindsay told Shaffer, rose to prosecutorial misconduct. He cited state Supreme Court case law and American Bar Association standards in making his argument.

“They say it's unprofessional conduct for the prosecutor to express his personal belief or opinion,” he said, “as to the truth or falsity of any testimony or evidence as to the guilt of the defendant.”

But Simon noted that a closing argument is not considered testimony, a point Shaffer later made to the jury as a cautionary instruction.

“(The jury) considered and discussed each count independently and thoroughly and they came back with some not guilties and some guilties,” Simon said. “That tells me they considered every fact in the case, testimony-wise.”

As part of his motion, Lindsay also asked the court to release Gniewkowski on bail pending resolution of his appeal.

“The court will take the matter under advisement,” Shaffer told the defendant, “and issue a written opinion.”