Federal judges in Wyoming threw out the grand‑jury indictments after concluding that Darin Smith’s conduct “penetrated the proceedings in off‑the‑record conversations” and that the cumulative effect of his remarks left “grave doubt” about the fairness of the indictments. The judges described the misconduct as “deeply concerning” and noted that Smith’s behavior fell far short of the prosecutor’s proper role, which is to present evidence without offering subjective evaluations of its strength.
Smith’s office declined to comment on the order, and the judges’ stay means the dismissals will not take effect unless Smith fails to challenge the ruling by the deadline. Defense lawyers argue that allowing Smith to re‑present the cases “with a clean slate” would effectively reward the U.S. Attorney’s Office for an “institutional cover‑up.” They also contend that subordinate attorneys could not impartially police violations by their own chief executive, prompting a request that the entire office be disqualified from the prosecutions.
The controversy arrives as Smith’s pending nomination to become the permanent U.S. Attorney for Wyoming faces a Senate vote. Critics note that Smith’s tenure has been “fraught with accusations of incompetence” and that his attendance at the Jan. 6 Capitol riot has already drawn scrutiny. Senators John Barrasso and Cynthia Lummis, who support Smith, have not responded to inquiries about whether the allegations will affect their votes.
If the dismissals become permanent, the nine defendants would avoid the pending felony charges, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office would need to restart the prosecutions under a new grand jury, a step the judges warned could “offer zero deterrence to future constitutional violations.”