'Chaos in the criminal process': Tyler Robinson prosecution opposes motion to postpone May hearing

PROVO, Utah (ABC4) -- Previously, the defense team for Tyler James Robinson, accused of killing political influencer Charlie Kirk on Utah Valley University campus, filed a motion asking the court to push back hearings so that they could review evidence. The prosecution team has since filed a motion, arguing that the defense team has enough evidence.

Robinson, 22, has been charged with one count of aggravated murder and several other felonies for allegedly shooting and killing Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University. He is facing the death penalty and has been involved in extensive court proceedings related to this case.

Preliminary hearings are currently scheduled for May 18, 19, and 22. However, on March 30, Robinson's defense team filed a motion asking the court to postpone or vacate the May 18 hearing.

The defense team argued that they had not yet received the prosecution's evidence and would need significant time to review it once received. The evidence reportedly includes witness testimony, phone and social media data, and forensic DNA and ballistics reports that may indicate that the bullet recovered during Kirk's autopsy cannot be linked to a rifle tied to Robinson.

Late Friday night, the prosecution filed a memorandum in opposition to the defense's motion to postpone the hearings.

In that memorandum, the prosecution states, "As of April 1, 2026, counsel for the state had provided approximately 100% of discoverable material in its possession to the defense. In other words, the defense has what the state has."

The prosecution also argues that the defense has had plenty of time to review the evidence and that most of it, with a few exceptions, has been available for at least six months prior to the May 18 hearing.

Additionally, the prosecution argues that a preliminary hearing is just that, preliminary. They reportedly do not have a legal obligation to provide the expert's findings before a hearing, only just before trial.

"This distinction matters because, at the stage of a preliminary hearing, investigation and

expert discoveries are often incomplete," the prosecution's memorandum states. "Detectives and analysts may be continuing their investigations, reducing them to writing, finalizing them, and approving them for dissemination."

In their memo, the prosecution argues that the defense team's motion "would create chaos in the criminal process," by requiring the state to complete all expert investigation before the hearing or delay all additional investigation until after the hearing.

"The fact that the rules expressly anticipate ongoing investigation and discovery, especially

expert discovery, demonstrates the flaw in Defendant's position," the memorandum reads, later stating, "Defendant's preferred analysis puts the cart before the horse by attaching late-stage rights to one of the earliest stages of the proceedings."

At this time, the court has not decided whether to postpone the May 18 hearing. Robinson's next hearing is scheduled for April 17, where it is expected that the parties will discuss a recently filed motion to bar all media photographers, cameras, and microphones from the courtroom.