Wyoming Statutes

Wyo. Stat. § 1-7-102 (2026)

Venue in criminal cases generally.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WY-LEGwyoleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     (a) Every criminal case shall be tried in the county in
which the indictment or offense charged is found, except as
otherwise provided by law.

     (b) When the location of a criminal offense cannot be
established with certainty, venue may be placed in the county or
district where the corpus delicti is found, or in any county or
district in which the victim was transported.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2026 · leading case: Kyle Joseph Anderson v. The State of Wyoming, 2014 WY 74 (Wyo. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kyle Joseph Anderson v. The State of Wyoming, 2014 WY 74 (Wyo. 2014). · cites it 10× “6 In accordance with article 1, section 10 of the Wyoming Constitution 7 and Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (Lexis-Nexis 2013), 8 the trial court also instructed that venue could be established as follows: When the location of the offense cannot be established with certainty, then an…”

Duke v. State, 2004 WY 120 (Wyo. 2004). · cites it 2× “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (a) (LEXIS 1999).”

Smith v. State, 2009 WY 2 (Wyo. 2009). · cites it 2× “Similarly, Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (a) states that "[elvery criminal case shall be tried in the county in which the indictment or offense charged is found, except as otherwise provided by law.”

McCone v. State, 866 P.2d 740 (Wyo. 1993). · cites it 2× “Concerning venue, W.S. 1-7-102 (1988) provides: (a) Every criminal case shall be tried in the county in which the indictment or of *747 fense charged is found, except as otherwise provided by law.”

Merch. v. State, 4 P.3d 184 (Wyo. 2000). · cites it 2× “Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (Lexis 1999). If the location of the crime cannot be established with certainty, it is constitutionally permissible to place venue in the location where the essential facts comprising the crime are discovered.”

Urbigkit v. State, 2003 WY 57 (Wyo. 2003). “§ 1-7-102(a) (LEXIS 1999). Trial proceedings are transferred to another county "only if the court is satisfied that there exists within the county where the prosecution is pending so great a prejudice against the defendant that the defendant cannot obtain a fair and impartial…”

Sides v. State, 963 P.2d 227 (Wyo. 1998). · cites it 2× “1, § 10; Wyo. Stat. § 1-7-102(a) (1997). On the other hand, the "constitutional standard for fairness" requires a panel of impartial jurors.”

Lemus v. State of Wyoming, 2007 WY 111 (Wyo. 2007). · cites it 2× “" Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (a) (LEXIS 1999).”

Poitra v. State, 2012 WY 58 (Wyo. 2012). · cites it 2× “18 echoes that law and states, "except as otherwise permitted by statute or these rules, the prosecution shall take place in the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed[.”

Brandon Lee Wells v. The State of Wyoming, 2026 WY 37 (Wyo. 2026). · cites it 2× “§ 9-1-805 (2025) (substitution of a district attorney for a conflict of interest or refusal to act); Wyo.”

Sanchez v. State, 2006 WY 116 (Wyo. 2006). · cites it 2× “2d at 327 (quoting Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 1-7-102 (a) (LEXIS 1999)).”

— Wyo. Stat. § 1-7-102(a) — 2 cases

Sides v. State, 963 P.2d 227 (Wyo. 1998). “1, § 10; Wyo. Stat. § 1-7-102(a) (1997). On the other hand, the "constitutional standard for fairness" requires a panel of impartial jurors.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.