Memorandum
- From
- Derek Weston via fox - U.S.
- Date
- Filed
- News·5 min to read
- Re
Kohberger Seeks Judge's Removal in Post-Conviction Case
ReKohberger Seeks Judge's Removal in Post-Conviction Case
Bryan Kohberger's new attorney is pressing to disqualify Judge Steven Hippler from post-conviction proceedings, arguing the judge's harsh sentencing remarks and comments on Kohberger's truthfulness create an appearance of bias. Prosecutors counter that the statements are routine and insufficient to show bias.
Bryan Kohberger's newly appointed attorney is renewing an effort to disqualify the judge overseeing his post-conviction proceedings, arguing that Judge Steven Hippler's sharp criticism of Kohberger at sentencing and his doubts about Kohberger's honesty raise legitimate questions about the judge's impartiality.
In a 12-page filing, court-appointed attorney Greg Rauch accused Latah County prosecutors of "regurgitating" procedural rules instead of confronting the specific concerns laid out in his motion to remove Hippler. Rauch first sought the judge's disqualification on Aug. 27 in a 22-page motion, and his latest filing pushes back on the state's opposition.
At sentencing last year, after Kohberger admitted to killing four University of Idaho students, Hippler described him as a "faceless coward" who "slithered" into the victims' home and called the crime the work of "the worst of the worst." The judge also questioned whether Kohberger was capable of telling the truth, asking how anyone could be assured that anything he said would be truthful.
Rauch argues that those remarks, combined with other statements and rulings, could lead an informed, reasonable observer to question the court's impartiality. He wrote that the motion does not rest on a single adverse ruling or one harsh statement, but on "the extraordinary convergence of all of them."
The defense also points to a June 26 scheduling order in which Hippler rejected a request for more time from Kohberger's previous attorney, Anne Taylor, describing her discovery complaints as "ultimately empty" and suggesting she was trying to delay the trial. Six days later, at a change-of-plea hearing, Hippler asked Taylor whether she had been able to complete all the discovery she felt necessary, and she replied, "Yes, Your Honor."
Prosecutors, in their opposition filed earlier this month, contended that Kohberger has failed to show Hippler is biased. Outgoing Latah County Prosecuting Attorney Bill Thompson and Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Keith Scholl wrote that the judge's sentencing remarks about a defendant who had admitted to killing four innocent students were neither unusual nor out of line.
They argued that the remarks are not enough to establish bias and that the required showing of perceived bias cannot be tied to the court's ability to fairly adjudicate post-conviction relief claims. In their view, the court is in the best position to handle those claims, as intended by the legislature and the Idaho Supreme Court's rules.
Rauch also suggested that Hippler could voluntarily recuse himself to avoid any appearance of partiality. He further argued that prosecutors attributed concessions to Kohberger that were never made, mischaracterized his initial motion, and failed to address some of his arguments.
"The State's Response does not resolve this motion by repeating the ordinary rule, supplying concessions Petitioner never made, or calling the disputed statements routine," Rauch wrote. He added that "a request for an impartial adjudicator is certainly not a request for a sympathetic one," and that reassignment would change the judge, not the evidence or the governing law.
Kohberger is attempting to withdraw his guilty plea in the November 2022 murders of Madison Mogen, 21, Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20. The former criminology Ph.D. student initially filed a handwritten petition for post-conviction relief in July. Rauch was later appointed to represent him and has until Jan. 13, 2027, to file an amended petition expected to be far more detailed.
A hearing on the disqualification motion had been scheduled for Thursday, but Hippler abruptly canceled it. The dispute now centers on whether the judge's own words and prior rulings have undermined the appearance of fairness required in the next phase of the case.
5
