Kaylee Goncalves (bottom left) and Madison Mogen (top left), Ethan Chapin and Xana Kernodle (Law&Crime Network file photos), (right) Bryan Kohberger (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, Pool, File)
The Idaho Supreme Court has decided that Bryan Kohberger, the person accused of killing four University of Idaho students in their sleep, cannot contest the trial judge’s decision to not dismiss his indictment from November 13, 2022.
In December, one month after ruling that the eventual trial will be livestreamed on the court’s YouTube channel, the Latah County jurist presiding over the high-profile case, Judge John C. Judge ruled against Kohberger’s defense by finding that the defendant was indicted by “an impartial grand jury who had sufficient admissible evidence to find probable cause” that he murdered Ethan Chapin, 20, Xana Kernodle, 20, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, and Madison Mogen, 21, at an off-campus house on King Road in Moscow, leaving behind a grisly crime scene that his since been demolished. The judge additionally ruled that prosecutors “did not engage” in misconduct “in presenting their case” to the grand jury.
The defense responded on Feb. 8 to the unfavorable rulings by seeking the leave of the Idaho Supreme Court to appeal.
The state’s top court has now ruled, however, that Kohberger does not have permission to appeal. Saying the decision was reached “after due consideration,” the court flatly “DENIED” Kohberger’s request. At the same time, the court agreed to seal the motions that were submitted by the defendant and the state, keeping those arguments for and against the appeal secret:
A MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS and MOTION TO SEAL DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS were filed by counsel for Defendant on February 8, 2024. An OBJECTION TO “MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS” and MOTION TO SEAL PLAINTIFF’S “OBJECTION TO MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS” were filed by counsel for Plaintiff on February 20, 2024. Therefore, after due consideration,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s MOTION TO SEAL DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS and Plaintiff’s MOTION TO SEAL “MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS” are GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM INTERLOCUTORY ORDERS is DENIED.
This ruling means that a least one basic but nonetheless important hurdle has been cleared when it comes to bringing Kohberger to trial, though a 2025 start to that proceeding remains a likelihood.
In the near term, reportedly as soon as April 17, the judge in the case will hear arguments raised by Kohberger in favor of changing the trial venue, which the defense maintains must occur if he is to receive a fair trial. The defense cited “extensive, inflammatory pretrial publicity” and the “salacious nature of the alleged crimes” to support their argument that an impartial jury cannot be seated in Latah County.
Prosecutors reportedly countered that Kohberger’s global notoriety will follow him wherever the trial is held.
Read the brief denial here.