Court Filing
Electronically Filed 10/24/2024 2:12 PM Fourth Judicial District, Ada County Anne Taylor Law, PLLC Trent Tripple, Clerk of the Court By: Jennifer Keyes, Deputy Clerk Anne C. Taylor, Attorney at Law PO Box 2347 Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83816 Phone: (208) 512-9611 iCourt Email: info@annetaylorlaw.com Jay W. Logsdon, First District Public Defender Idaho State Public Defender 1450 Northwest Blvd. Coeur d'Alene, Idaho 83814 Phone: (208) 605-4575 Elisa G. Massoth, PLLC Attorney at Law P.O. Box 1003 Payette, Idaho 83661 Phone: (208) 642-3797; Fax: (208)642-3799 Assigned Attorney: Anne C. Taylor, Attorney at Law, Bar Number: 5836 Jay W. Logsdon, First District Public Defender, Bar Number: 8759 Elisa G. Massoth, Attorney at Law, Bar Number: 5647 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ADA STATE OF IDAHO CASE NUMBER CR01-24-31665 Plaintiff, REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION ΤΟ V. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE UTTER DISREGARD AGGRAVATOR BRYAN C. KOHBERGER, Defendant. COMES NOW, Bryan C. Kohberger, by and through his attorneys of record, and hereby submits the following Reply to the State's Objection to his Motion for an Order striking from the state's Notice Pursuant to Idaho Code § 18-4004A the allegation that the murder itself or by its circumstances showed an utter disregard for human life. REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE UTTER DISREGARD AGGRAVATOR Page 1 The State's Objection to Mr. Kohberger's argument that Idaho cannot rewrite a statute via " glass " consists of the same argument it made to Mr. Kohberger's objection to the HAC, and Mr. Kohberger incorporates his response in that Reply to the extent that it is the same. The State, however, goes on to argue that the gloss does not change what the legislature had intended by the aggravator. This argument is based on the literal words of the aggravator. Mr. Kohberger would point out that the literal words of the statute were so broad that the Idaho Supreme Court held that they were unconstitutional: Under Gregg, it is apparent that the language contained in I.C. ss 19- 2515 (f) (5) and (6) is facially constitutional. However, inasmuch as a reasonable person could fairly characterize any murder as “ especially heinous, atrocious or cruel, manifesting exceptional depravity ” and as exhibiting an “ utter disregard for human life, " it is equally apparent under Godfrey that this court must place a limiting construction upon these statutory aggravating circumstances so as to avoid the possibility of their application in an unconstitutional manner. State v. Osborn, 102 Idaho 405, 417-18 (1981). So, it changed the aggravator to save it. It took an unambiguous law and changed it. Mr. Kohberger's interpretation of the literal words of the statute derive from the statutes and decisions that made use of the words “ utter disregard " throughout history. The ICJI and the Supreme Court's gloss was simply a “ saving construction " created by the Court to stop itself from having to hold the aggravator unconstitutional – which it was, and continues to be. This Court must so find. DATED this 24 day of October, 2024. Jay Lessder BY: JAY W. LOGSDON FIRST DISTRICT PUBLIC DEFENDER REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE UTTER DISREGARD AGGRAVATOR Page 2 CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was personally served by placing a copy of the same as indicated below on the 24day of October, 2024, addressed to: Latah County Prosecuting Attorney –via Email: paservice@latahcountyid.gov Elisa Massoth – via Email: legalassistant@kmrs.net Jay Logsdon – via Email: Jay.Logsdon@spd.idaho.gov Ingrid Batey – via Email: ingrid.batey@ag.idaho.gov Jeff Nye – via Email: jeff.nye@ag.idaho.gov Dul REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE UTTER DISREGARD AGGRAVATOR Page 3