The distinction between Benjamin’s accidental death and his parents’ later conduct has shaped every major step of the Idaho prosecution.
NAMPA, Idaho — The death of 12-day-old Benjamin was officially ruled an accident, yet the hours surrounding his suffocation produced felony convictions for both parents after investigators concluded that the newborn had been living in unsafe conditions and that his death scene was changed before authorities arrived.
The difference matters in understanding the case against Allysen Armenta, 28, who now awaits sentencing after pleading guilty to felony injury to a child and entering Alford pleas to two evidence-related felonies. Prosecutors have not treated the case as a homicide, and the Canyon County coroner classified the manner of Benjamin’s death as accidental. The criminal proceedings have instead focused on the child’s living environment, the delay before authorities were fully informed and the decision to move Benjamin from the travel trailer where he died to a bassinet inside a nearby house.
The Canyon County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office said Benjamin died sometime between about 11 p.m. Dec. 15, 2025, and 2 a.m. Dec. 16 while co-sleeping with Armenta and the child’s father, Brian Lemke, in the trailer. The coroner determined that suffocation caused the death. Public records have not established that either parent intentionally suffocated the infant, and the official accidental classification remains in place. That finding limits what can accurately be said about criminal responsibility for the death itself, even though prosecutors pursued separate felonies arising from the same night.
The post-death conduct is clearer because Lemke later admitted key parts of it in court. After Benjamin was found dead, Lemke moved him from the travel trailer into the main house on the property, swaddled him and placed him in a bassinet, according to Canyon County prosecutors. He then called 911 at about 3:30 a.m. Investigators said the movement deprived them of an untouched original scene. At his later plea hearing, Lemke answered yes when Judge Thomas Whitney asked whether he had delayed notification and moved the child away from where the death occurred.
Armenta’s role in the evidence case was resolved differently. In August, she entered Alford pleas to two felony counts involving destruction, alteration or concealment of evidence. Such a plea has the effect of a guilty plea but allows a defendant to refrain from expressly admitting factual guilt while acknowledging that the state has evidence sufficient to convict. She separately pleaded guilty to felony injury to a child. A misdemeanor obstruction charge was dismissed under the agreement. Those three convictions remain intact despite a recent change in her legal representation.
That was not the agreement Armenta was originally expected to accept. When she appeared July 30, the anticipated deal called for pleas involving injury to a child and failure to notify authorities of a death, with additional charges expected to be dismissed. As Whitney questioned her about the factual basis, Armenta discussed sleeping with Benjamin in the bed, the poor condition of the residence and her access to a cellphone. The judge halted the proceeding, met with the lawyers and later announced that a legal issue required additional research. No final plea was entered that day.
The case returned to court in August with the revised terms. Prosecutors said moving Benjamin from the trailer had destroyed the original crime scene and established another scene inside the house. That allegation gave the evidence counts a central role in the new agreement. Armenta’s Alford pleas allowed the state to obtain convictions on those charges without a trial, while her direct guilty plea to injury to a child addressed the conditions in which Benjamin had been living before his death.
Those living conditions had been a concern from the beginning of the investigation. Reports based on court documents described the trailer as filled with trash, food debris, dirt, cigarettes and animal waste. The owner of the trailer later told Idaho News 6 that she found serious damage and unsanitary conditions when she regained possession. Prosecutors called the environment unsuitable for a newborn. Such descriptions were used to explain the child-injury case, but they should not be confused with a medical finding that the environment itself intentionally caused Benjamin’s death.
The family’s history added another layer. Local reporting cited court documents showing that Armenta and Lemke had previous convictions involving harm to children and that multiple older children had been removed from their care. Women caring for some of those children said they had contacted child-welfare officials before Benjamin died because they were concerned about the newborn. Canyon County later confirmed that Child Protective Services had asked Nampa police for assistance locating the parents and baby during the two days before the death.
Those circumstances fueled criticism of how quickly the state responds to reports involving newborns whose caregivers have documented child-protection histories. Benjamin’s death was later cited by supporters of Benji’s Law, legislation designed to speed up safety checks in certain high-risk infant cases. The debate expanded the impact of the case beyond the courtroom, but the legal judgments against Armenta and Lemke remain separate from broader arguments over what state agencies could or should have done before the death.
Lemke’s sentencing illustrates that separation. On July 24, Whitney sentenced him to a unified 15-year prison term for failure to report a death and destruction or concealment of evidence, with parole eligibility after six years. Lemke apologized and said he wished he could undo his actions. His attorney emphasized that the infant’s death had been accidental. Whitney responded that his task was to sentence Lemke for the crimes of conviction. The court did not impose punishment for homicide, but it found the concealment and reporting offenses serious enough to warrant years in prison.
Armenta had been moving toward her own sentencing before another procedural problem emerged. On Sept. 24, her attorney asked to leave the case. Whitney granted the request and directed the State Public Defender’s Office to appoint new counsel. Because a replacement lawyer would need time to study the record, the judge vacated the existing sentencing date rather than require someone newly assigned to proceed without adequate preparation. The judge described the case as complex and the stakes as high.
The same hearing included discussion of a letter Armenta had sent directly to prosecutors. The state told the court the letter remained unopened and had not been disclosed, and Whitney said he had not reviewed it. The court indicated that it should be returned rather than considered outside ordinary procedures. Nothing about the letter changed Armenta’s pleas, and no new factual findings about Benjamin’s death were announced at the hearing.
A status conference is scheduled for Oct. 1, when the court can determine whether new defense counsel is in place and consider how to reset sentencing. Until then, Armenta stands convicted on the injury and evidence counts but has not received a sentence. Lemke is already serving the term imposed in his case. The coroner’s ruling also remains unchanged: Benjamin died from accidental suffocation, while the felonies prosecuted against his parents arose from child-safety circumstances and their conduct before investigators could examine the scene as it originally existed.
Author note: Last updated September 30, 2026.