ADA COUNTY, Idaho — Bryan Kohberger and his attorneys spent most of the day in an Ada County courtroom Thursday arguing motions related to the death penalty.

Kohberger is set to go on trial in Ada County on August 11, 2025. He is charged with burglary and four counts of first-degree murder in the fatal stabbing of University of Idaho students Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin — in an off-campus house in November 2022.

RELATED: Summer 2025 trial date set for Idaho college student murder suspect Bryan Kohberger.

Prosecutors first filed their intent to seek the death penalty in June 2023. Since then, Kohberger’s attorneys have filed several motions in an attempt to take the death penalty off the table. It was the focus of discussions at Thursday’s meeting.

The defense had hoped to call two experts to testify, but Judge Steven Hippler ultimately ruled against allowing the testimony.

The first closed part of the hearing focused on Kohberger’s attire for future hearings. When the public portion of the hearing began at 9:10 a.m., the defendant was wearing a suit and tie in the courtroom.

Judge Steven Hippler said Kohberger will be allowed to appear in street clothes for future hearings.

RELATED: Kohberger’s defense is filing a motion to quash the state’s notice of intent to seek the death penalty.

As arguments began Thursday morning, the state opened with objections to allowing the testimony of defense expert Coroner Barbara Wolf, saying it was far too early in the court process to take that testimony.

Hippler agreed with these arguments, and Wolf did not testify.

Fourth Judicial District Court of Idaho

Defense attorney Ann Taylor then focused on claims that Idaho cannot properly execute death row inmates.

“Idaho doesn’t have a current means of executing anybody,” Taylor said. She went on to argue that keeping a person on death row without a way to carry out an execution is dehumanizing.

Judge Steven Hippler cut Taylor short, saying Idaho has legal means to seek the execution, citing lethal injection and the firing squad, indicating that the isolated incident involving Thomas Creech’s failed execution attempt in February was an individual circumstance that did not -would apply in no other situation. case.

RELATED | Federal stay of execution granted to Creech after Idaho Supreme Court rejects appeal

Creech’s execution was canceled after eight failed attempts to insert an IV line.

Judge Hippler said that even if Kohberger was convicted, it would be more than 10 years before an execution was carried out and “who knows” what methods would be in place at that time.

Taylor argued that anxiety and “not knowing” whether an execution would be carried out was cruel, unusual and unconstitutional. Judge Hippler cited the state Supreme Court decision just this week denying the same argument for Thomas Creech.

RELATED: Motion to stay Thomas Creech’s execution denied by Idaho Supreme Court.

The state expressed that the defense arguments are too vague and should not be accepted. “They haven’t even suggested what an appropriate alternative would be, and we don’t even know decades from now what the alternatives would be,” Assistant Attorney General Jeff Nye said.

Hippler said the court will consider those arguments and issue a decision later.

The defense then asked the judge to allow the testimony of professor Aliza Cover, whose research has examined capital punishment and constitutional law.

“I do not believe that the testimony will be relevant or helpful to the court’s decision on this issue,” Hippler finally said.

“Opinions about the law are generally not admissible by experts. It is the court that decides questions of law and not someone else’s opinion about what the law is; therefore (the wolf’s) opinions are not relevant or useful and , are therefore not admissible.” Hippler said.

With no expert testimony admissible, the court then continued arguments on several defense motions to impose the death penalty.

Fourth District Court of Idaho

First, the defense argued on grounds of arbitrariness.

“Our definition is so broad that there is no narrowing,” the defense argued. “Essentially, there are no guidelines.”

Kohberger was handcuffed and escorted out of the courtroom for a brief break before arguments continued on motions to strike statutory aggravators, including total disregard, multiple murders, how heinous or cruel an alleged crime was and “future dangerousness.” of the defendant.

The defense ultimately argued that each aggravator should be stricken because the Idaho law is far too vague and argued that applying the aggravators as written violates the Eighth Amendment.

Assistant Attorney General Jeff Nye with the state argued that all the aggravators have been upheld in previous courts and asked the judge to deny the defense’s motions to strike the aggravators.

Among other reasons, the defense wants the death penalty off the table for reasons related to a qualified jury for the death penalty.

“It goes to the point of why we’re arguing all of this right now — there’s a huge difference between picking a death-qualified jury and a non-capital-qualified jury,” the defense argued. “Death-qualified juries are very likely to convict in the guilt-innocence phase, and we are very concerned about that.”

Taylor argued that if Kohberger had gone to trial on the original October 2023 date in Latah County, he would have had to waive his right to a fair and impartial jury and effective counsel.

The defense argued it was a conflict of constitutional rights — specifically that Kohberger must choose between effective assistance of counsel or a speedy trial. In Idaho, a case must be brought to trial within about six months of indictment, unless a defendant waives his right to a speedy trial. However, the defense argues that it is not possible to properly conduct this legal process for a death penalty case so quickly.

Nye argued, “The real problem that the defense understands here is that they didn’t have to waive his constitutional right, but they did.”

After a break for lunch, the defense continued its arguments to impose the death penalty on the grounds that it violates international law.

Kohberger’s lawyers argue that “Idaho’s death penalty procedure violates international treaty provisions and fundamental precepts of international human rights,” and because “international treaties ratified by the United States are binding on state courts, the imposition of the death penalty is illegal . “

In addition to the death penalty motions, Jay Logsdon, along with Kohberger’s defense team, filed a motion to trifurcate the proceedings, which would divide the trial into three phases — guilt, eligibility and sentencing — arguing that it would facilitate a process. the jury to understand and fulfill their duties.

“Studies have shown that juries really want to get these things right, but they really want to follow through,” Logsdon said. “A lot of times the instructions they get aren’t that clear and I think adding to their book by cramming everything into one hearing is unnecessary.”

Nye argued that it wasn’t necessary because jurors would be given plenty of instructions.

“The court can’t just start with the assumption that the jurors won’t follow the law or that it’s just too troubling or too confusing for the jurors. The jurors will be instructed,” Nye said.

Judge Steven Hippler will consider all arguments and issue a ruling at a later date.