SALINAS, Calif. — The men accused of murdering California Polytechnic State University student Kristin Smart and hiding her body in 1996 were back in court in Salinas on Wednesday.
Pretrial motions resumed Wednesday in Monterey County Superior Court in the trial against Paul and Ruben Flores, with many motions pertaining to which statements and evidence can be admissible and shown to the jury.
Motions were filed by both the defense and prosecution.
Paul Flores, 45, is accused of murdering 19-year-old Smart after an off-campus party in May 1996, while his father, 81-year-old Ruben Flores, is accused of helping hide her body. The two men were arrested in April 2021.
The trial against the Flores men was moved to Salinas after San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen ruled that they would likely not receive a fair trial in San Luis Obispo County because of pretrial publicity.
On Wednesday morning, Monterey County Superior Court Judge Jennifer O'Keefe ruled on three motions — two for the prosecution and one for the defense.
The prosecution filed a motion to enter a January 2020 recorded phone conversation between Paul Flores and his mother, Susan Flores, as an adoptive admission, meaning a defendant admitted to the crime by their words or conduct.
In the conversation, Susan Flores told her son to "listen to the podcast," presumably Chris Lambert's "Your Own Backyard" podcast, and "see where we can poke holes in it."
According to prosecutors, the incriminating line occurred next, when Susan Flores said "only you know that." Her son did not respond.
Robert Sanger, Paul Flores' attorney, argued that it was not an adoptive admission because the podcast is "provocative and factually inaccurate," adding that it is natural for a mother to warn her son of a podcast that is accusing him of a crime that has a sentence of 25 years to life in prison.
Sanger also said that because Paul Flores did not respond to the comment, so it was not an admission.
San Luis Obispo County Deputy District Attorney Chris Peuvrelle said that the recorded conversation met the threshold of an adoptive admission, and O'Keefe agreed.
The judge said under the adoptive admission statute, silence can sometimes be more evidentiary than a response. She said the only time silence would not be evidentiary is if Fifth Amendment protections applied in the conversation, and in this case it did not.
O'Keefe is allowing the recorded conversation to be admitted into evidence.
The next issue regarded whether statements made by Paul and Ruben Flores could be shown to both juries.
The statements in question included interviews between Paul Flores and law enforcement on May 31, 1996, and June 19, 1996, as well as a comment Ruben Flores made to San Luis Obispo County Sheriff's Office Detective Clint Cole when a DNA search warrant was served in May 2021.
The 1996 law enforcement interviews were categorized as testimonial, the judge ruled, so the jury for Ruben Flores will have to leave the courtroom when it is heard.
Sanger argued that the statement Ruben Flores made when he was served the warrant was "a slip of the tongue," and is more unduly prejudicial rather than probative.
O'Keefe ruled the statement to not be testimonial, but it is admissible, so both juries will hear the statement.
The final motion was filed by the defense, asking the judge to throw out a February 2020 search warrant that led to the seizure of Paul Flores' electronics equipment.
Sanger argued that law enforcement illegally obtained the warrant, and focused on Flores as the only suspect even though there were others.
The attorney said that law enforcement lied to the judge when they said Flores was the only suspect, and omitted that there were others they were looking into.
He said that law enforcement officers obtained warrants using "a Wild West approach."
Sanger said that law enforcement officers often cite training and experience as reasons warrants should be maintained, but aren't required to prove they actually have that training and experience.
Judges were pressured to grant warrants because of the publicity surrounding the Smart case in San Luis Obispo County, Sanger said, and so they did not scrutinize how unsubstantial those warrants were.
Sanger closed his argument asking O'Keefe to "take a step back and look at (the warrants) from an intellectual and legal perspective" and separate from the emotions that prevailed in San Luis Obispo County.
Peuvrelle argued that there is a high standard to throw out a search warrant, and that the defense did not meet it. He said that Paul Flores became the only suspect because as time passed, all other suspects were systematically eliminated.
Evidence against Flores was all that could be found, Peuvrelle said.
The prosecutor said that the warrants were obtained legally as were the electronic items that were seized. The defense failed to prove that law enforcement engaged in "reckless disregard for the truth," he said.
O'Keefe agreed with Peuvrelle, ruling that the warrant is legal and admissible. She said the defense failed to demonstrate law enforcement made false statements and deliberate omissions to help obtain a search warrant, and that there was not a reckless disregard for the truth.
O'Keefe is expected to rule Wednesday afternoon or Thursday on a motion regarding whether a mugshot of Paul Flores from his May 17, 1996, arrest on suspicion of drunken driving that shows a black eye can be admitted as evidence.
Previously, the judge ruled that if a certified copy of the mugshot could be found she would allow it.
When court resumed to hear the motion, Sanger said he has become aware of evidence that has to do with the mugshot and needs more time.
The motion will be heard when court resumes later Wednesday or on Thursday.
Other motions expected to be heard include whether cadaver dog evidence and soil evidence should be admissible, O'Keefe said.
There are other motions filed in the Monterey County Superior Court computer, but because nearly all of them are sealed it is unclear to what they pertain.
Screening of more than 1,500 prospective jurors in the Smart murder trial began June 13 in Salinas.
Paul Flores' jury selection was held June 27 and 28, and Ruben Flores' jury will be selected from July 11 to July 15.
Opening statements in the trial will begin July 18.
