Seeks to suppress evidence, rule out death penalty
Since Jan. 30, the defense for Stephan Sterns, the man police have charged with the murder of Kissimmee 13-year-old Madeline Soto, has filed nearly 70 motions to the court in his defense as of Wednesday.
A number of them have to do with getting the death penalty eliminated as a sentence for the crime, challenging its constitutional legality. Others ask that much of the evidence from the case be suppressed due to unlawful seizure of Sterns’ phone.
One other interesting one asks the court to close all pretrial hearings to the public and media. In those hearings, the defense asserts it will pursue “Other motions… which could include a motion for a change of venue if the media coverage of this case continues as it has so that Mr. Sterns cannot receive a fair trial in Osceola County and most of the state of Florida.”
Police say Sterns, 37, killed Soto, the daughter of his on-again, off-again girlfriend, at some point on Monday, Feb. 26, 2024. Her body was discovered along Hickory Tree Road south of St. Cloud on Friday, March 1. Sterns, who has pled not guilty, remains held in the Osceola County Jail.
Police initially charged Sterns with some 60 counts of sexual battery and possessing child sexual assault materials (CSAM) after sexual and suggestive photos and videos of who they identify as Soto and him were found on his phone and Google drive. In April, he was formally charged with murder, and the State of Florida announced the intent to seek the death penalty.
Sterns was scheduled to have a status hearing on the 60 counts Wednesday, with time for a trial in the last week of February and first two weeks of March. Those are expected to be continued, as Sterns’ defense filed a motion noting the initial set of depositions are scheduled for March 4 and April 10 and evidence viewing on March 24.
Details of some of the motions Sterns’ defense team has filed a motions to suppress the evidence found on his phone, as counsel claims in the court documents it was seized “without consent, without a warrant and without exigent circumstances,” then held for nine hours before the
SOTO UPDATE Orange County Sheriff ’s Office “coerced a purported ‘consent’ for its examination” at 1:30 a.m. on Feb. 27. The defense notes the Sheriff’s detective asked Sterns for consent to search the phone, “Or do I need to get a search warrant?” It cities the Fourth Amendment which protects against “unreasonable seizure of property.”
A number of the motions work to eliminate the death penalty for a myriad of reasons. One defense position cites Florida statutes that allow for capital punishment unconstitutional, citing articles and amendments to the state and U.S. Constitution. Another cites the process of death qualification “impairs the impartiality of the jury.”
“Exercising peremptory strikes against jurors who are opposed to the death penalty denies Mr. Sterns his right to a jury who follow religious teachings opposed to the death penalty and many people of color who are opposed to the death penalty,” another motion reads.
A number of motions are clear in what specific instructions to the jury are given, regarding how to weigh the evidence, imposing a death penalty, and that they may consider “mercy” as well as “residual doubt,” defined as, “A lingering doubt that a jury has about a defendant’s guilt, even after finding them guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It can also refer to a small degree of doubt that a juror has about a defendant’s guilt … residual doubt can be used as a mitigating circumstance in some cases to avoid the death penalty.”
The defense asked, by motion, to be allowed to question prospective jurors on their religious beliefs as it relates to being able to impose the death penalty.
Some motions are dedicated to excluding victim impact statements, noting they “violate the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution because this information is irrelevant to a capital sentencing decision,” or exclude evidence or argument designed to create sympathy for the victim or “vilify” the accused. Another motion filed asks for any impact statements be read by a neutral party.
The defense also implored the court to allow testimony regarding the impact of Sterns’ execution on his family members.
There is also a request in the pile of motions that the Assistant State Attorney instructs witnesses to use the term “homicide,” rather than the word “murder” during testimony.
Court documents do not specifically set a date for any of these motions to be heard. (Check AroundOsceola.com for coverage of Wednesday’s status hearing) Stern’s firstdegree murder trial is currently scheduled for a late September trial docket, with a Sept. 10 pretrial hearing.
