California Attorney General Denounces Paul Flores’s Appeal to Reduce Sentence for Kristin Smart’s Murder

California Attorney General Rob Bonta has strongly criticized Paul Flores, the individual convicted of murdering California Polytechnic State University freshman Kristin Smart in 1996. Flores recently filed a request to have his convictions overturned or reduced, a motion Bonta dubbed “meritless.”

Currently, Flores is serving a 25-year-to-life sentence following a three-month trial that concluded in October 2022. His conviction stemmed from the tragic disappearance of Smart, a 19-year-old student, who vanished after leaving an off-campus party in San Luis Obispo.

Legal Challenges from Flores’s Defense

In a detailed 107-page court filing, Flores’s attorneys argue that King County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O’Keefe abused her discretion on several counts. They claimed this included failing to dismiss a juror whom the defense believed exhibited bias, as well as allowing disturbing images, such as a ball-gag photo, to be presented at the trial’s conclusion.

Flores’s appeal contends that even a single error normally would not inhibit his right to a fair trial. However, the defense asserts that the cumulative effect of multiple alleged errors invalidated that right.

Attorney General’s Response

Addressing the appeal, Bonta’s office affirmed that Flores’s claims do not warrant any modification of his convictions. They argued that each alleged error presented by the defense lacked substance and should be considered harmless.

“The cumulative error argument lacks merit,” Bonta’s office stated. “Each alleged error lacks merit and was harmless.” This definitive stance reflects the Attorney General’s commitment to uphold the integrity of the judicial proceedings surrounding the case.

Questionable Juror Conduct

One notable point in Flores’s appeal concerns Juror No. 273. The defense pushed for her removal from the jury on several occasions, citing indications of bias. In response, Bonta’s office maintained that the trial judge acted appropriately, highlighting the substantial evidence supporting the finding of the juror’s neutrality.

“Substantial evidence supports the trial court’s finding that Juror No. 273 had not lost her ability to remain neutral,” the report elaborated.

Rape Testimonies and Their Impact

Flores’s defense also contends that testimonies from rape victims contributed to an environment of bias against him. In interviews with the San Luis Obispo Tribune, three jurors emphasized the importance of these testimonies in their deliberations. They believed that such evidence established a pattern reflecting Flores’s attempt or actual commission of rape before Smart’s murder.

Bonta’s office countered this argument, asserting that victim testimonies complied with legal standards for admissibility in court. They emphasized that a defendant does not need to be directly charged with a sexual offense for such evidence to be permissible.

“Appellant (Flores) was entitled to a fair trial, not a perfect one,” his prosecution team noted in their response. This highlights the legal standards that govern courtroom procedures.

A Call for Closure

As the legal battles persist, Trevor Boelter, one of the last individuals known to have seen Smart alive, has publicly urged Flores to reveal the location of her remains. Nearly three decades since her disappearance, Boelter stated, “Paul Flores needs to come clean and tell the Smart family where Kristin’s body is located.”

Smart’s Tragic Legacy

Kristin Smart’s tragic case continues to resonate deeply within the community. She was declared legally dead in 2002, but her remains have never been recovered. The ongoing quest for justice underscores the lasting impact of this case on her family and friends.

In October 2022, Flores was convicted of first-degree murder in connection to Smart’s disappearance. Prosecutors accused him of killing her during an attempted sexual assault in his dorm room, subsequently disposing of her body in an undisclosed location.

The Road Ahead

Looking ahead, Flores is scheduled to respond to the Attorney General’s brief by May 5, an important date in this ongoing legal matter. As the case develops, it continues to draw attention, highlighting the complexities of the legal system and the relentless pursuit of justice for victims and their families.

The legal proceedings may not only influence the remnants of Flores’s appeal but also serve as a crucial reminder of the unsolved mysteries that linger in cases of missing persons and violent crime.