Paul Flores appeals murder conviction in Kristin Smart case | Local News

In a 105-page brief filed Oct. 21 with California’s Second District Court of Appeal, Paul Flores cited a “series of errors” that led to his murder conviction, including the trial court’s failure to issue a dismissing a juror who responded with an emotional outburst over testimony and the improper introduction of evidence portraying him as a sex offender.

As a result, Flores said the court deprived him of his right to a trial by a fair and impartial jury and due process, in violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments, respectively, of the U.S. Constitution.

“As a result of the court’s rulings, appellant did not receive a trial before a fair and impartial jury,” Flores’ brief states. “The errors described above deprived the complainant of the fair trial to which due process was entitled. He therefore asks this court to vacate his murder conviction or, alternatively, reduce the crime to murder (second degree).”

Smart, 19, went missing on May 25, 1996, after an off-campus party in San Luis Obispo. According to witness Cheryl Manzer, a former student, Flores, also a student at Cal Poly, was the last person seen with the drunken Smart just steps from their dorm rooms at the intersection of Perimeter Road and Grande Avenue.

Smart was declared dead in 2002 and the search for her body continues to this day.

Ruben Flores, the father of Paul Flores, was charged with accessory after the fact to murder and accused of burying Smart under the patio of his home in the 700 block of White Court in Arroyo Grande.

Paul Flores and his father were each tried at the same time, but by separate juries in Salinas. Although Paul Flores was convicted after a three-month trial in October 2022, a jury acquitted Ruben Flores.

In March 2023, Paul Flores was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole for 25 years.

After the testimony of witness Steven Fleming, a former classmate of Smart’s, the person identified as “Juror No. 273” told the court that he was afraid of the tension that resulted from what he said was the witness’s aggressive and repeated questioning came from the defense attorney, Paul Flores’ letter says.

Additionally, Flores said the juror experienced an emotional outburst and interrupted court to request a recess during the testimony of prosecution witness Cindy Arrington, a forensic archaeologist, who described a ring of decay that formed in the ground where Smart was supposedly buried beneath the deck of the White Court.

When the jury was not present, the judge told the court that the juror was “audibly crying” and, according to Arrington’s testimony, was “gasping and crying.”

Flores’ defense attorney told the court that the juror’s actions caused a “big, big disruption,” drawing the attention of other jurors who tried to comfort the juror.

The bailiff told the judge that Juror No. 273 told him during the court recess that she was “completely neutral” until Arrington’s testimony and that she “felt for the first time that there might be guilt,” according to Flores’ brief.

Flores’ defense attorney had repeatedly requested that Juror No. 273 be dismissed, but the court denied those requests.

“Appellant believes without concession that the trial court in this first case could reasonably have chosen to take Juror No. 273 at her word rather than dismissing her immediately,” Flores’ brief states. “On the other hand, it was apparent at the time of subsequent events that Juror No. 273 was unable to follow the court’s orders or function as a fair and unbiased juror.”

The brief also says the trial court abused its discretion by admitting inflammatory evidence of two unaccused sexual assaults, despite Flores’ objections.

The evidence admitted at trial included the testimony of two female witnesses “on the basis that the prosecution alleged aggravated murder in the course of rape or attempted rape,” Flores’ brief said.

Flores said there was no evidence that Smart’s rape or attempted rape occurred, and that just because there is a theory of aggravated rape does not automatically give prosecutors the right to present evidence of uncharged sexual offenses.

The court compounded that error by allowing a lay witness to testify that Smart’s behavior at the party reminded him of a personal experience after taking a date rape drug, the brief says.

Other errors were made by the trial court, including allowing the prosecution to present a still image of a woman with a ball gag in her mouth taken from a video allegedly found on Flores’ home computer.

“The prosecutor further supported his theory by using the shock effect of the ball gag photo to portray the complainant as a violent sexual predator,” the brief states.

Solomon Wollack, who is set to represent Flores in his appeal, did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment Monday.

San Luis Obispo County Assistant District Attorney Eric Dobroth declined to comment on the appeal Monday, citing preservation of all parties’ due process rights and the “integrity of the judicial process.”