Brad Srebnik

ALPENA — Brad Srebnik, the Alpena man convicted of killing two women in 2021, claims in his appeal that some testimony shouldn’t have been allowed during his trial and that police used faulty cell phone location data to obtain search warrants.

A jury in February found Srebnik guilty of killing Alpena women Brynn Bills and Abby Hill and Judge Alan Curtis in March sentenced Srebnik to life in prison.

Prosecutors said Srebnik strangled Bills and mutilated and buried her body behind the Naylor Road home of his friend, Josh Wirgau. Prosecutors said Srebnik shot Hill in the head when he feared Hill would go to the police to report that he murdered Bills.

Srebnik appealed his conviction in April.

In a brief filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals on Thursday by Srebnik’s attorney, Stuart Friedman, Srebnik said mistakes during the trial need to be corrected during the appeal.

Prosecutors have 35 days to respond, though appellate judges could grant an extension if both parties agree to one.

Alpena County Prosecutor Cynthia Muszynski said she believes the handling of the case, the witnesses, and the evidence was done by the book.

“The probability of an appeal is high after any jury trial, and a near certainty in a higher-profile case,” she said. “I am confident in the educated and precise work that was executed during this trial by all the parties and believe we will be successful at this stage of the process, as well.”

CELL PHONE DATA

As part of the extensive investigation into the killings, police sought multiple search warrants for presumably disconnected cell phones used by Srebnik.

Police based each of the warrant requests on historical data police obtained from Hill’s cell phone.

In Thursday’s filing, Srebnik challenged the accuracy of the cell phone’s location data and claimed Hill, Srebnik, and Wirgau could have been miles apart.

“The search warrant affidavit is carefully painted to show that people were together when they could have been up to 30 miles apart,” Srebnik’s brief says. “In Alpena, most residents are within thirty miles of one another at any given time. The search warrant affidavit glazes over this point and presents the evidence in a false light.”

WIRGAU TESTIMONY

The court allowed Wirgau to testify that Hill confided in him before she died that she believed Srebnik was going to kill her.

It is considered hearsay when a witness shares the words or thoughts of another person and judges often do not allow such testimony during trial.

However, Curtis allowed the testimony from Wirgau.

Wirgau and other witnesses lied to investigators on multiple occasions.

Wirgau received a plea deal on charges related to the mutilation of Bills’ body and other charges in exchange for his testimony against Srebnik.

“Judge Curtis expressly relied on Ms. Hill’s inability to explain or deny the statement as a basis for holding that this statement could not come in,” Srebnik’s brief says. “This was a misconstruction of the rules of evidence and must be reviewed de novo and reversed.”

SREBNIK’S TATTOO

During the trial, a witness testified that she was a very good friend of Hill and noted that Srebnik had a “1%” tattoo, a symbol associated with criminal motorcycle gangs.

Srebnik’s defense attorney called for a mistrial, saying the meaning behind the tattoo could influence jury members.

Curtis denied the motion.

Srebnik in his Thursday brief said “the remedy in this case should have been a mistrial.”

Steve Schulwitz can be reached at 989-358-5689 or sschulwitz@TheAlpenaNews.com. Follow him on X @ss_alpenanews.com.

Read Brad Srebnik’s entire appellate brief below.

Brad Srebnik Appeal Brief by JustinHinkley on Scribd