SANDPOINT — James Matthew Anderson’s defense counsel is challenging his second-degree murder conviction.

Chief Public Defender Isabella Robertson argues the Bonner County jury which found Anderson guilty failed to properly consider all the evidence at hand and disregarded jury instructions.

Robertson filed a motion Monday asking the court to set aside the jury’s verdict and acquit Anderson. A motion to stay a judgment in the case and either release Anderson on his own recognizance or further reduce his $200,000 bail was also filed.

A hearing on the defense motions is planned for Nov. 17 in 1st District Court.

The moves come six days after the jury convicted Anderson of the second-degree murder in the shooting death of Elvin “Eli” Holt, 30.

Anderson, 29, was accused of shooting Holt in the face at point-blank range during an argument outside Anderson’s trailer in Sagle on Nov. 27, 2008.

Prosecutor Louis Marshall argued during the six-day trial that Anderson opened fire without just cause and with malice aforethought. Robertson countered that Anderson retrieved a .44-caliber pistol in self-defense when he was confronted and threatened by Holt and Holt’s stepbrother at about 11 p.m. on the night of Thanksgiving.

Anderson, 29, did not testify during the trial, though Robertson argued the weapon discharged accidentally when Holt’s stepbrother bumped Anderson’s hand during the conflict.

The jury of seven men and five women was instructed to consider several lesser charges, including voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter. However, the murder charge topped the list of possible offenses in the jury instructions, which meant jurors never made it to the list of lesser included charges during their four hours of deliberations.

In her motion to set aside the verdict, Robertson contends “the jury based its verdict on the fact that they felt it was improper for the Defendant to have gone into his home and retrieved the firearm at all, or that he should have fired a warning shot into the air” rather than considering whether Anderson’s actions satisfied the statutory elements of the murder charge.