Florida Supreme Court rejects Mark Sievers’ appeal of murder conviction

The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday rejected Mark Sievers’ appeal of his first-degree murder conviction and corresponding death sentence, as well as his conviction for conspiracy to commit murder.

“We are relieved, to say the least,” said Annie Lisa, Teresa’s sister.

According to court documents, Sievers’ lawyers argued in the appeal that the trial court’s ruling violated his confrontation rights and “deprived him of an opportunity to explore [Curtis Wayne] Wright’s motives for murdering [his wife] Dr. Sievers.”

Sievers was found guilty in 2019 of planning the murder of his wife, Dr. Teresa Sievers, in their Bonita Beach home, and of paying Curtis Wayne Wright and Jimmy Rodgers to do it. Wright was Sievers’ best friend. He and Rodgers killed Teresa Sievers in an ambush after she returned home from a family vacation in Connecticut.

Sievers’ lawyers argued there was plenty of evidence to tie Wright and Rodgers to the murder, but not enough to connect sievers to the crime.

Wright was offered a 25-year sentence in exchange for his testimony tying Sievers and Rodgers to the crime.

READ MORE: Teresa Sievers’ convicted killer Jimmy Rodgers claims innocence, plans to file for new trial

WINK News spoke with Teresa’s sister, Annie Lisa, on Thursday afternoon. “I just got off the phone and learned that the appeal has been denied and that his verdict and sentence have been upheld. And let my family know we just sent a group text to my mother and my brother and our close friends,” said Lisa.

She said reliving Teresa’s death, and Sievers’ conviction brought up many emotions.

“To get this news, just two days before my sister’s birthday again, just a reminder that my sister’s always around to let us know that. She’s working her magic from the other side,” Lisa said.

Sievers’ stepmother Jennie Weckelman sent WINK News a brief statement that says, “I was very disappointed in our Cupreme Court. It seemed like they just could not grasp the subtleties of the arguments.”