Federal public defenders on Friday asked judges to dismiss six felony grand-jury indictments because U.S. Attorney for Wyoming nominee Darin Smith allegedly prejudiced jurors by calling the defendants “murderers,” among other things.

In six separate dismissal motions that mirror one another, the public defenders allege that Smith told the grand jurors that “every case” they would consider that day “involves bad people,” according to the motions.

Smith allegedly also told the jurors that the defendants were “murderers,” according to an affidavit by a defense investigator. Smith allegedly told the jurors that the evidence was so overwhelming that the jury could return indictments in minutes, court papers state.

Smith is alleged to have made the statements in front of the grand jury on March 16, 2026, before a judge entered the chamber. Public defenders called the statements “egregious prosecutorial misconduct” that violated the defendants’ rights to an unbiased grand jury.

“The misconduct here poisoned the well before proceedings even began,” the motions state. “It impacted not only the defendant in the above-captioned case, but every defendant whose case was considered by the grand jury that week,” one motion reads.

The attorneys asked that the indictments be dismissed or that a judge review the grand jury transcripts and query jury members to determine whether the allegations against Smith are valid.

“When the government indoctrinates the entire jury pool with predetermined guilt and instructions on how quickly to return an indictment, the structural integrity of every subsequent proceeding heard by that grand jury is irreparably broken,” one pleading reads. “Thus, the prosecutor’s flagrant misrepresentations not only erases [sic] any notion of an unbiased jury but injures the very democratic ideal reflected in the empaneling of a grand jury.”

A spokesperson for Smith said that the matters are before a court and his office would not discuss details while proceedings are ongoing.

“The grand jury was established to function as a shield for the innocent against malicious and oppressive prosecution. It was never intended to serve merely as a rubber stamp.”

Tracy R. Hucke

The grand jury indictments allege crimes ranging from possession of a firearm by a felon, to drug distribution, to possession of child pornography. All defendants have pleaded not guilty but remain jailed by the U.S. Marshal.

One motion seeks dismissal of a charge against Dennison Jay Antelope. He is charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm, a Tarus pistol. He pleaded not guilty and a trial date has been set for June.

Another dismissal is sought for a charge against Wolf Elkins Duran who pleaded not guilty to possession of child pornography. Attorneys filed a third dismissal motion for charges against Michael Scott Hopper. He pleaded not guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of firearms.

The grand jury returned an indictment against Matthew Miller, Jr., alleging he possessed methamphetamine and cocaine with the intent to deliver them. He pleaded not guilty.

Attorneys also seek dismissal of charges against Cheyenne Swett that allege felony possession of firearms and ammunition including a 19X Glock GMBH 9 mm pistol, a Sig Sauer SIG M400 rifle and a Springfield Armory XD Mod 3 pistol. Swett has pleaded not guilty.

The final petition seeks dismissal of two charges against Cameron Justin Agee for being a felon in possession of a firearm and possessing a stolen firearm. Agee pleaded not guilty.

“The grand jury was established to function as a shield for the innocent against malicious and oppressive prosecution,” one dismissal motion states. “It was never intended to serve merely as a rubber stamp for the prosecutor. 

“To say, without a doubt, that the jurors were not influenced by [Smith’s] comments would rely on the assumption that the jurors wholly ignored the prosecutor’s initial remarks but then complied with their obligation to pay attention to the prosecutor once the formal proceedings commenced,” the motions state. “Such an assumption beggars belief.”

Angus M. Thuermer Jr. is the natural resources reporter for WyoFile. He is a veteran Wyoming reporter and editor with more than 35 years experience in Wyoming. Contact him at angus@wyofile.com or (307)...

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *