Former Idaho State Rep. Aaron von Ehlinger testifies on his own behalf during day three of his rape trial at the Ada County Courthouse, Thursday, April 28, 2022. (Brian Myrick/Idaho Press)
The Idaho Supreme Court on Monday morning heard arguments about whether the judgment of former Idaho legislator’s conviction should be vacated.
Aaron von Ehlinger, 42, was convicted of raping a former intern by an Ada County jury in August 2022. He was sentenced to at least eight years in prison, with another 12 years or the possibility of parole, for a total of 20 years in prison.
Former Idaho Rep. Aaron von Ehlinger sentenced to at least 8 years in prison for rape
One month after his sentencing, von Ehlinger gave notice that he was appealing his case to the Idaho Supreme Court.
Von Ehlinger’s attorney, Erik Lehtinen with the State Appellate Public Defender’s Office, argued on Monday that there were two errors committed during his trial.
First, Lehtinen argued the district court made an error that violates the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment, which provides the right to cross examine. During the trial, the victim gave limited testimony and left the courtroom after saying “I can’t do this,” the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported. The victim’s limited testimony was stricken from the jury’s consideration, and the prosecution relied on testimony from a Faces of Hope nurse who assisted the victim two days after the incident.
“The district court’s error, in allowing testimonial hearsay of an unavailable witness that had not been cross-examined, in violation of Aaron’s unwaived right to cross-examination under the Confrontation Clause, was a clear error,” the appellant brief states.
Second, Lehtinen argued that the district court made a mistake by allowing the prosecution to introduce evidence through leading questions.
During the trial, the prosecution asked the Faces of Hope nurse as to whether von Ehlinger “forced his penis into (the victim’s) mouth” over the defense counsel’s objections. The judge overruled the objections at the time, but Lehtinen argues the objection allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence through leading questions, in violation of court policy.
Deputy Attorney General Kenneth Jorgensen said during the hearing that von Ehlinger’s defense was being tactical when they did not request a mistrial or acquittal.
The appeal is under advisement, and the court will make a decision at a later time.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.