Unsealed memo claims Kohberger was unable to 'rationally understand' Idaho murders case
A recently unsealed court memo involving Bryan Kohberger, who seeks to
overturn his guilty plea in the murders of four University of Idaho students in Moscow, indicates that his former attorneys questioned whether he fully understood the case.
The unsealed memo was filed by Kohberger's new defense attorney, Gregory Rauch, on August 27 as part of Kohberger's motion to
disqualify Judge Steven Hippler from his effort to overturn his plea. Judge Hippler was the judge who served on the murder case and ultimately sentenced Kohberger to life in prison. Judge Hippler ordered the memo to be unsealed on Tuesday.
According to court documents obtained by KTVB, in the May 2025 ex parte supplement, counsel advised the court that Kohberger was having difficulty "comprehending adverse rulings" and how they would impact the case overall. Despite the significant rulings throughout the case regarding the "death penalty, suppression issues, and motions in limine."
Kohberger's defense claims he was "having difficulty incorporating those developments into a rational assessment of the case..." court records state.
Because of the counsel’s concern regarding Kohberger’s “ability to rationally understand the proceedings” and make decisions accordingly, the counsel advised the court to provide additional time to conduct a “targeted inquiry” into Kohberger’s understanding and provide expert assistance.
The petitioner explained the May 20 submission did not establish “that Kohberger was legally incompetent”, however trial counsel “expressly said otherwise,” according to the memorandum.
Court records state that the memorandum explained that, before June 26, the Court was aware of counsel’s request for more time to both review evidence and investigate Kohberger’s ability to obtain expert assistance and make consequential decisions.
The Court denied the request for additional time and the June 26 order “rejected the need for further investigation,” stating there was not good cause to delay the trial. Kohberger entered a guilty plea six days later.
While Kohberger's lawyer acknowledges this timeline of events doesn’t establish the pleas as "constitutionally invalid,” Rauch said it does raise the issue of “whether trial counsel had sufficient time and assistance” to ensure Kohberger’s understanding of entering a plea and resolving the case short of trial – a decision counsel identified to Judge Hippler as one that required expert assistance. The continuance was denied.
What’s next?
The post-conviction relief court may have to discern what events occurred during the six days between the Court’s denial of additional time and Kohberger’s plea.
The Court may also need to assess counsel’s understanding of Kohberger’s ability to comprehend the case, whether concerns expressed ex parte “remained operative,” the expert assistance or accommodations provided, what advice or information Kohberger received and whether he was indeed able to “rationally evaluate the alternatives” before entering a guilty plea, according to Kohberger's lawyer.
Kohberger will have his first post-conviction hearing on Oct. 15, when Judge Hippler will hear arguments on whether he should be disqualified from Kohberger's new case.
Other plea-related hearings are set for summer 2027.
