State responds to Mark Sievers’ appeal

Reporter: Anika Henanger
Published: Updated:
Mark Sievers sentencing. Photo via WINK News

Mark Sievers, convicted of orchestrating the death of his wife Dr. Teresa Sievers, received a response to his appeal.

In it, the state pushed back hard on the defense’s motion that Sievers deserves a new trial.

Sievers was convicted in 2019 for the 2015 death of Dr. Sievers.

Now in 2021, his lawyers are fighting to keep him alive.

“If it’s a .1% chance that a judge might find it has any credibility, you’re gonna throw it out there, with the chance that maybe somebody grabs on to it,” said attorney Lance Dunford, with the law firm of Scott T. Moorey.

Dunford followed the case closely.

He’s not surprised the state grabbed onto Sievers’ appeal and tried to tear it apart.

For example, Sievers argues the jury didn’t get a chance to hear a possible motive for the killing: A possible sexual relationship between Mark Sievers and co-defendant Curtis Wright.

“When Mark doesn’t get on the stand to bring that up, so a jury is actually hearing about it, it really doesn’t become so relevant, you’re almost, you’re throwing things at a wall at that point,” Dunford said.

Besides, a motive doesn’t give Sievers the right to hire Wright to kill his wife.

Sievers’ lawyers also said the jury should never have seen all those gruesome pictures of Dr. Sievers.

FGCU Professor Pam Seay explained the state’s view.

“The judge made a call to say that only certain amounts of these photos would be admitted, a sufficient amount of information was presented to the jury so that they would know and understand how this person died,” said Seay, a professor of justice studies.

In the end, what matters is what the justices on the Florida Supreme Court think of the Sievers appeal.

It could take months before the Supreme Court of Florida responds to the appeal.

Copyright ©2023 Fort Myers Broadcasting. All rights reserved.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without prior written consent.