4 Univ of Idaho Students Murdered, Bryan Kohberger Arrested, Moscow, Nov 2022 #96

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

BeginnerSleuther said:
I'm pleasantly surprised because it could have gone the other way, but not surprised at the decision itself. I've felt for a very long time that it would be next to impossible to find a completely objective jury in Moscow/Latah County just based on human behavior and the response to community trauma.

MOO.
Click to expand...
From reading his order:
Reasons for COV:
Presumed prejudice
Safety
Logistics
JMO
 
SpiderFalcon said:
In the document filed, the court said, “Kohberger's Motion to Change Venue is granted pursuant to Idaho Criminal Rule 21(a) and 21(b). Consistent with the language of Idaho Criminal Rule 21(c)(2)(B), this Court orders transfer of venue "without specifying the new place of venue" and refers "the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to court of proper venue in another judicial district and assignment of specific judge to preside in the criminal proceeding."

From: Judge grants Bryan Kohberger's change of venue request.

Looks like JJJ doesn't want to be the Judge any more, also:

(B) if the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge must enter an order transferring the case without specifying the new place of venue, and then refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue in another judicial district and assignment of a specific judge to preside in the criminal proceeding.

From: I.C.R. 21. Transfer for Trial | Supreme Court
Click to expand...

IMO ultimately this is for the best (JJJ gave lots of very good practical reasons in section 2 of his order), but I kinda hope JJJ stays on... I've gotten used to it being him!
I guess it's up to the Idaho Supreme Court now and we'll hopefully find out soon. Boise I guess?
 
Given the large number of Christ Church members in Moscow--whose leaders have been at odds with Moscow LE to the extent that three who were arrested filed a suit that the City recently settled for $300K, I think the venue change may also be better for the prosecution. Those little "internal" battles can sway folks as much as media coverage of a suspect.

JMOO
 
Swansee said:
IMO ultimately this is for the best (JJJ gave lots of very good practical reasons in section 2 of his order), but I kinda hope JJJ stays on... I've gotten used to it being him!
I guess it's up to the Idaho Supreme Court now and we'll hopefully find out soon. Boise I guess?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing it may be moved to the brand new courthouse being built in Nez Perce if it's completed in time.

A courthouse for the next century
 
May
Swansee said:
IMO ultimately this is for the best (JJJ gave lots of very good practical reasons in section 2 of his order), but I kinda hope JJJ stays on... I've gotten used to it being him!
I guess it's up to the Idaho Supreme Court now and we'll hopefully find out soon. Boise I guess?
Click to expand...
Judge Judge is off the case, and imo, it is a good thing. No further comment about it. It's an opinion with no further details.
 
arielilane said:
May

Judge Judge is off the case, and imo, it is a good thing. No further comment about it. It's an opinion with no further details.
Click to expand...

I wonder if it's pro forma in a situation like this when a trial is moved to a new location in Idaho, and if part of the process of turning the case over to the Idaho Supreme Court to determine a new venue also includes the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to select not only the new venue, but also the judge who will preside over the case. If that is part of the process, then presumably the Supreme Court could select Judge Judge to preside over the case in the new venue?
 
iamshadow21 said:
Whoa. Was not expecting that.
Click to expand...
I expected this would have to happen due to the extensive negative media coverage. I also noticed JJJ was not making many decisions over the past few months, when decisions he was being asked to make, seemed rather simple and straightforward but could have later implications for the trial. IMO, JJJ was likely expecting/planning for this as well and didn't want to cause issues for whoever WILL be the judge for this trial.

I do believe, for the residents of Moscow, this is the right decision. The media converging on Moscow and all the people coming in for the trial would have been a complete and utter mess for their small city.

All JMO.
 
Just read the Goncalves' family statement. I stand with the family. I always have and I always will.
They're the voice for their daughter Kaylee. Glad to see how they keep it loud and strong, louder than BK's whimpers.
They are given no choice but to push back.

All my love and support to Kaylee Goncalves’ family. Stay strong. Your love is stronger than evil BK.
 
Sundog said:
I wonder if it's pro forma in a situation like this when a trial is moved to a new location in Idaho, and if part of the process of turning the case over to the Idaho Supreme Court to determine a new venue also includes the Supreme Court's jurisdiction to select not only the new venue, but also the judge who will preside over the case. If that is part of the process, then presumably the Supreme Court could select Judge Judge to preside over the case in the new venue?
Click to expand...
@Sundog , here is the ICR 21 link, which answers what the Idaho Supreme Court will do, according to the way JJJ wrote the COV:

I.C.R. 21. Transfer for Trial | Supreme Court

JJJ specifically put in his order: https://s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/...r-Granting-Defendants-Motion-Change-Venue.pdf
1725909682823.png
Which says: (B) if the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge must enter an order transferring the case without specifying the new place of venue, and then refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue in another judicial district and assignment of a specific judge to preside in the criminal proceeding.
 
Sundog said:
I don't think it is clear that Judge Judge wants to take himself off the case, particularly if he didn't say so in his ruling, but Idaho Statute is somewhat unclear about this -

(2) Venue Changed Pursuant to Subsection (a)(1)(A) or (B). If change of venue is granted pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) or (B) to a different judicial district is granted, the court must enter an order changing venue and suggesting a court of proper venue and refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue and for assignment of a specific judge to preside. If the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge may so indicate in the order.

BBM


See full Idaho Statute, below, on "Change of Venue".


Supreme Court

Published on Supreme Court (https://isc.idaho.gov)


Home > I.R.C.P. 40.1. Change of Venue

I.R.C.P. 40.1. Change of Venue​

Idaho Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 40.1. Change of Venue.

(a) Motion for Change of Venue. A judge may change venue only upon motion by any party.

(1) Discretionary. A judge may grant a change of venue or change the place of trial to another county as provided by statute or when it appears by affidavit or other satisfactory proof that:

(A) there is reason to believe that an impartial trial cannot be had in the county in which the action is filed, or

(B) the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by the change.

(2) Mandatory. The judge must change the venue of a trial when it appears by affidavit or other satisfactory proof that the county designated in the complaint is not the proper county, which motion must be made no later than 14 days after the party files a responsive pleading.

(3) Objection to Change of Venue. Upon a motion for change of venue under subsection (2), the court may consider an objection based upon subsections (1)(A) or (1)(B). The court may deny an otherwise proper motion for change of venue under subsection (2) if it finds that an impartial trial cannot be had in the proper venue or that the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice would be promoted by retaining jurisdiction in the county where the action is filed.

(4) Sanctions. When a judge grants a motion for change of venue pursuant to subsection (2), the court may assess sanctions against the party who filed the action or the party’s attorney if the court finds that the action was filed in the improper venue without good cause.

(b) Change of Venue in Same Judicial District. If venue is changed to a court of proper venue within the same judicial district, the judge granting the change of venue must:

(1) order the case transferred to a specific court of proper venue within the judicial district; and

(2) continue the assignment over the case, unless the administrative district judge reassigns the case to another judge of the judicial district.

(c) Change of Venue to a Different Judicial District.

(1) Venue Changed Pursuant to Subsection (a)(2). If change of venue to a different judicial district is granted pursuant to subsection (a)(2) a new presiding judge is assigned as follows:

(A) if the original judge desires to continue the assignment over the case, the judge may so indicate in the order, suggesting a court of proper venue, and refer to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue and for assignment of a specific judge to preside; or

(B) if the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge must enter an order transferring the case to a proper county and the receiving judicial district must assign a judge pursuant to the assignment procedures of that district.

(2) Venue Changed Pursuant to Subsection (a)(1)(A) or (B). If change of venue is granted pursuant to subsection (a)(1)(A) or (B) to a different judicial district is granted, the court must enter an order changing venue and suggesting a court of proper venue and refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue and for assignment of a specific judge to preside. If the original judge does not desire to continue the assignment over the case, the judge may so indicate in the order.

(d) Disqualification of Judge on Change of Venue.

(1) Change of Venue Within a Judicial District. If a judge is disqualified from further handling of a proceeding in which a change of venue has been granted to a court of proper venue within the same judicial district, the administrative district judge must reassign the case to another judge of the judicial district.

(2) Change of Venue to a Different Judicial District. If a judge is disqualified from further handling of a proceeding in which a change of venue has been granted to a different judicial district, the administrative district judge of the receiving judicial district must refer the case to the administrative director of the courts for assignment by the Supreme Court to a court of proper venue and assignment of a specific judge.


(Adopted March 1, 2016, effective July 1, 2016; amended September 9, 2016, effective September 9, 2016, amended April 25, 2018, effective July 1, 2018.)

Powered by DrupalP
Click to expand...
@Sundog Your attachment is for a Change of Venue on a CIVIL PROCEDURE.

The Judge, in his COV order, used ICR 21, which is for CRIMINAL CHANGE OF VENUE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 3,000 (members: 191, guests: 2,809)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
2,809
Total visitors
3,000
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
603,835
Messages
18,164,182
Members
231,872
Latest member
Noseynellie1234
Back
Top