Reply to Objection to Motion to Strike

Close

Court Filing

PDF Reply to Objection to Motion to StrikeDeath Penalty Challenge
court Court Filing Idaho 4

Named in this document

  • Jay Logsdon Person
  • Bryan Kohberger Person
  • Elsa G. Massoth Person
  • Ingrid Batey Person
  • Jay Lossderr Person
  • Jennifer Keyes Person
  • Mr. Nye Person
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 TO
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

V. STATE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO

SEEK DEATH PENALTY ON GROUNDS

BRYAN C. KOHBERGER, OF CONTEMPORARY STANDARDS OF

DECENCY

Defendant.

COMES NOW, Bryan C. Kohberger, by and through his attorneys of record, hereby submits the following Reply to the State's Objection to his Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the Grounds of Contemporary Standards of Decency.

REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

STATE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY ON GROUNDS

OF CONTEMPORARY STANDARDS OF DECENCY Page 1

The State argues that the Idaho Supreme Court previously determined that contemporary standards of decency do not preclude the death penalty in State v. Abdullah, 158 Idaho 386, 455 (2015). The Court in Abdullah ruled against his challenge, finding that to launch such a challenge, a defendant needs to show changes in legislation or executive action to go along with changes in public opinion. Id. At that time, the Court found that “ [t] hirty-two states, the military, and the federal government continue to allow the death penalty as an option. ” Id. (citing DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER, http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty (last visited February 23, 2015); Tracy L. Snell, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Capital Punishment, 2012-Statistical Tables (Rev.2014), available at http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cp12st.pdf.).

That may have been true, but times have changed. Now, twenty-four states have an operating death penalty. DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state (last visited October 19, 2024).

The federal government has declared a hold on executions. Id. Ohio's governor has paused executions until a new method is adopted. Id. And Arizona has paused them until they can trust their courts to do the right thing. Id. Therefore, in reality, less than half the states still have the death penalty pursuant to legislative or executive actions. Taking population of those states into account, support for the death penalty is even bleaker. Of those that retain it, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, North Carolina, and Wyoming, have not executed anyone in at least ten years. DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/executions-overview/executions-by-state-and-year (last visited October 19, 2024). That leaves thirteen jurisdictions with active death rows.

Thus, the evolving standards of society, and the unusualness of the death penalty, have
REPLY TO STATE'S OBJECTION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

STATE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY ON GROUNDS

OF CONTEMPORARY STANDARDS OF DECENCY Page 2

changed. This Court should take these changes into account and strike the penalty in this matter.

DATED this 24 day of October, 2024.

Jay Lossdern
BY:

JAY W. LOGSDON

FIRST DISTRICT PUBLIC DEFENDER

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 24 day 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

STATE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY ON GROUNDS

OF CONTEMPORARY STANDARDS OF DECENCY Page 3