2016.02.26 Mark D. Sievers: Charged with Murder in the 2nd Degree

[AZlawyer]

Gotcha. So, even though they questioned the unanimity issue in october, they only ruled on the fact that in Florida a judge can assign DP based on different aggravating factors than the jury? Is that correct? But the death penalty is currently suspended in Florida, correct?

I don't see why it would be suspended. I'm totally confused by that suggestion. I would think everything could proceed as normal except that the jury has to be asked specifically what facts they found in aggravation and the judge can't override the jury recommendation. So the statute about the judge overriding is out, but that doesn't mean the whole set of statutes is unusable.

 

[RANCH]

Supreme Court Strikes Down Part of Florida Death Penalty

When the case was argued in October, some justices asked about another aspect of the Florida system, which did not require a unanimous recommendation from the advisory jury.

The Supreme Court upheld Oregon’s approach in 1972. At the argument, Justice Sotomayor suggested that the court should consider overruling that decision. Her opinion on Tuesday did not address the issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/us/politics/supreme-court-death-penalty-hurst-v-florida.html?_r=0

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I thought the Florida death penalty was currently suspended due to a Supreme Court ruling deeming it unconstitutional, due to it not requiring unanimous jury vote. Is that not correct?? Anybody know?

They did make a ruling but I believe what they ruled against was the 7-5 for the death penalty on up to 9-3 but do allow it to be a 10-2 decision for death.

IMO

 

[atthelake]

The entire hearing has been uploaded to youtube just recently, in the last 4-5 hours. (13:37 long) Some of what I heard at the very end I didn't read about in MSM. I'm not sure I can post a non-MSM site here?

At the end, SA is saying that CWW has Judge ?Kyle?, and he expects that the other two will also be assigned the same judge. MS lawyer was questioning that all 3 of them have the same judge (Judge ?Kyle?), and he wanted them "blind filed the way they normally would be" and assigned randomly because they are not accused... are technically in separate informations/ warrants right now.. as they are not charged as codefendants.

The SA stated that they don't have to have a single charging document to be codefendants. The judge said best done this way, as to familiarity with the case. MS atty said he had a conflict with Judge Porter and where his office is located on the (mumble?). The judge stated the next stop for him then should be the judge reviews office. :escape:

... so, sounds like they are putting into place ensuring that the two remaining can possibly be in ONE trial :moo: vs. two, or possibly just having one judge and two trials. :waiting: :waiting: :thinking:

If a mod approves, I'll post the link - otherwise googling will find it easily on youtube. "We're live at Mark Sievers' first court appearance" by VE

 

[oceanblueeyes]

The death penalty is still a punishment option in Florida.

Under the new deal passed overwhelmingly Thursday night in a 93-20 vote in the Florida House, at least 10 out of 12 jurors would need to agree to impose a death sentence, according to The Miami Herald. Currently, a simple majority is needed to recommend the death sentence.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...omise-to-fix-florida-s-death-penalty-law.html

10-2 is a reasonable number imo. Usually it will be one lone wolf holdout like it was in the Arias case in CA.

I remember when Joe Smith kidnapped, raped, and murdered 12 year old Carl Brucia in Florida some years back the foreman on his jury was a Minister (he voted for death) and the vote was 10-2 for death. So that case should standup under the new ruling and others where it was almost unanimous.

IMO

 

[jtate0702]

I think it would be the opposite. Defendants would be insisting on a speedy trial before the DP is reinstated.
ETA: I wonder if that is one of the reasons the state doesn't seem to be in a rush to up the charges to Murder 1 n this case. Waiting to see if the DP gets reinstated quickly.

Lol, thank you! I had what I was trying to say backwards. I meant to say exactly that, that the DP eligible defendents would insist on a speedy trial while the DP was suspended. Thank you for pointing that out, I didn't even notice I wrote it incorrectly!

 

[ohreally]

I don't see why it would be suspended. I'm totally confused by that suggestion. I would think everything could proceed as normal except that the jury has to be asked specifically what facts they found in aggravation and the judge can't override the jury recommendation. So the statute about the judge overriding is out, but that doesn't mean the whole set of statutes is unusable.

Now I am confused. I thought the death penalty was on hold till Florida legislatures changed the way the law is written. I trust your understanding more than mine.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I am so glad to see this day finally come. I hate the fact that he got to be with the children all of this time though but I do know the police have to take their time and get everything right before arresting him.

I still do not understand why MS is not charged with first degree because this cant get any more premediated. At the time, I couldn't understand why Rodgers and Wright were only charged with second degree but now I realize a plea deal was in the works. Usually that is what happens in hit man cases. The actual murderer or murderers in these kind of cases get a deal for testifying against the mastermind.

In all the cases I have seen the mastermind gets the top charge since they were the ones who put the plot in play. Many of them were sentenced to death.

Has the DA mentioned if he is going to go to the GJ to have the charges upped? Sorry for asking, but, I have been sick the last week or so and haven't been able to keep up with all the breaking news on MS being arrested.

TIA

 

[jtate0702]

I don't see why it would be suspended. I'm totally confused by that suggestion. I would think everything could proceed as normal except that the jury has to be asked specifically what facts they found in aggravation and the judge can't override the jury recommendation. So the statute about the judge overriding is out, but that doesn't mean the whole set of statutes is unusable.

I completely agree. That is what I would have assumed too, it makes more sense than completely suspending the death penalty in Florida. But a judge recently did not allow prosecution to seek the death penalty in a different case, citing the fact that the state of FL does not currently have a constitutional death penalty (link below). When I started reading more on it, many news outlets were reporting that the DP was "suspended". Which seems crazy to me, and is really bothering me with MS now being in custody and charged. I support the DP, and to me is the type of case the DP was made for. Thats why I wanted to pick you brain on it. You have always been so helpful in helping us understand all the legal aspects, which are SO confusing! I really appreciate all of your input on this case!

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/0...mbling-to-fix-death-penalty-law.html?referer=

 

[RANCH]

Now I am confused. I thought the death penalty was on hold till Florida legislatures changed the way the law is written. I trust your understanding more than mine.

I don't think that the death penalty was actually "suspended" in Florida. Just a part of how they did things was stuck down by the Supreme Court.

It looks like the Florida legislature is working on changing the DP laws.

Under the new deal passed overwhelmingly Thursday night in a 93-20 vote in the Florida House, at least 10 out of 12 jurors would need to agree to impose a death sentence, according to The Miami Herald. Currently, a simple majority is needed to recommend the death sentence.

The proposal, to become law, requires approval approval from the Senate, then needs the signature of Republican Governor Rick Scott.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...omise-to-fix-florida-s-death-penalty-law.html

 

[DexterMorgan]

Mark would not want a speedy trial. Jmo. If Curtis dies of a heart attack before the defense can cross exam him; Then everything that he provided to the prosecution would be tossed.

So let's give Curtis the best medical coverage for the time being. Lol.

But if Mark dies before trial; Then Curtis deal may or may not die as well. Idk

 

[jtate0702]

The death penalty is still a punishment option in Florida.

Under the new deal passed overwhelmingly Thursday night in a 93-20 vote in the Florida House, at least 10 out of 12 jurors would need to agree to impose a death sentence, according to The Miami Herald. Currently, a simple majority is needed to recommend the death sentence.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...omise-to-fix-florida-s-death-penalty-law.html

10-2 is a reasonable number imo. Usually it will be one lone wolf holdout like it was in the Arias case in CA.

I remember when Joe Smith kidnapped, raped, and murdered 12 year old Carl Brucia in Florida some years back the foreman on his jury was a Minister (he voted for death) and the vote was 10-2 for death. So that case should standup under the new ruling and others where it was almost unanimous.

IMO

You just made my night! Thank you!!

 

[RANCH]

Mark would not want a speedy trial. Jmo. If Curtis dies of a heart attack before the defense can cross exam him; Then everything that he provided to the prosecution would be tossed.

So let's take give Curtis the best medical coverage for the time being. Lol.

But if Mark dies before trial; Then Curtis deal may or may not die as well. Idk

I'm not sure what you say is accurate.

Do you have a link saying if a witness dies before trial that their testimony captured before their death is always inadmissible.

 

[IM4TRUTH]

IMO, we will still be in for a few surprises when the entire truth comes out. Too much has gone on in that house.

I don't know, I don't think there will be any more bombshells. I think the intricate twists and turns have basically come out. But we will see!

 

[IM4TRUTH]

I'm not sure what you say is accurate.

Do you have a link saying if a witness dies before trial that their testimony captured before their death is always inadmissible.

That would surprise me too. If he signed off on it, then it shouldn't be dismissed.

 

[kimi_SFC]

I'm not sure what you say is accurate.

Do you have a link saying if a witness dies before trial that their testimony captured before their death is always inadmissible.

Perhaps this could be posed in the Q&A thread for AZLawyer to address?

ETA:
Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers - Q & A ONLY ***No Discussion***
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=290952


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DexterMorgan]

I'm not sure what you say is accurate.

Do you have a link saying if a witness dies before trial that their testimony captured before their death is always inadmissible.

Idk. Some courts may allow a dying declaration. But if a defense can not question the prosecutions star witness; Then that's kind of a 1 sided prosecution and usually is not allowed for the most part. Jmo

 

[Bobbywoo]

I don't know, I don't think there will be any more bombshells. I think the intricate twists and turns have basically come out. But we will see!

If the insurance money was only part of the reason he had his wife murdered I'm curious to know what the other part is. Simply because she was going to divorce him or something more nefarious as him dealing prescription drugs?

 

[DexterMorgan]

That would surprise me too. If he signed off on it, then it shouldn't be dismissed.

He signed off on a lot of things. Remember his lawyer stated that they were going to call in 100 witnesses to say that Curtis was in MO at the time.

Now they can not throw out the linking evidence. But they can throw out how Curtis explained how it was linked if Curtis just so happened to die before trial or being cross examined. Jmo.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I'm not sure what you say is accurate.

Do you have a link saying if a witness dies before trial that their testimony captured before their death is always inadmissible.

I have seen that happen in a few cases over the years where a deceased person's statement did come into trial. I cant remember the circumstances now but I think both the defense and state had deposed them so they were either videoed or made sworn statements. But they weren't part of the actual murder plot and were just lay witnesses in the case. I can remember the state asking the questions from a transcript and another state attorney will get on the witness stand with a copy of the same transcript and repeat the answers the deceased person gave.

Is Wright in poor health?

So I would be interested in knowing the answer too. Maybe AZ will be kind enough to answer it for us or maybe Dexter knows. The only problem I see is if the attorney for MS didn't get a chance to depose Wright. Then he may say he cannot cross examine a dead man.