Can a Wyoming Drug Possession Charge Be Dismissed?
A possession of controlled substance charge in Wyoming — whether for marijuana, mushrooms, cocaine, LSD, prescription pills, or any other controlled substance — is treated seriously under state law. A conviction carries real consequences: jail time, fines, a permanent criminal record, and the collateral damage that follows a drug conviction on employment background checks, professional licensing applications, and housing searches for years afterward.
But a charge is not a conviction. There are two fundamentally different ways a Wyoming drug possession charge can be dismissed, and they are not the same thing. Understanding which path applies to your case — and pursuing the right one from the beginning — can make an enormous difference in where things end up.
First: What Are the Charges?
Before looking at defenses, it helps to understand what you are actually facing.
Under Wyoming Statute § 35-7-1031(c), it is a crime to knowingly or intentionally possess a controlled substance without a valid prescription. This covers the full range of controlled substances — Schedule I drugs such as marijuana, psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, heroin, and MDMA; Schedule II drugs such as cocaine, methamphetamine, and prescription opioids without a valid prescription; and Schedule III through V substances.
Depending on the amount and type of substance possessed, a first-offense possession charge is often a misdemeanor under Wyoming law, punishable by up to 12 months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. If you possess an amount of controlled substance above the misdemeanor threshold or there is evidence that you are manufacturing, selling, or distributing controlled substances, you may be charged with a felony, punishable by up to twenty years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. The escalation from misdemeanor to felony on a third offense makes the outcome of a first and second charge especially consequential — a conviction now becomes the predicate for a felony charge later. Further, any person convicted of a second or subsequent offense under this act may be imprisoned for a term up to twice the term otherwise authorized, fined an amount up to twice that otherwise authorized, or both.
Wyoming does not have a separate, lesser marijuana possession statute. Possession of marijuana — even a small amount, even by a visitor from a state where it is legal — is a controlled substance offense under Wyoming law, treated the same as possession of any other Schedule I substance.
The First Path: Outright Dismissal
An outright dismissal means the charge is dropped entirely. There is no guilty plea, no probation, no record of the charge being resolved against you. The case ends because the evidence is legally insufficient or was obtained in violation of your constitutional rights — not because you completed a program or served a period of supervision.
Outright dismissals in drug possession cases typically arise from one of the following:
The Stop or Detention Was Unlawful
Most drug possession charges begin with a traffic stop or a pedestrian encounter. Under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement must have reasonable suspicion — based on specific, articulable facts — before stopping a vehicle or detaining a person. A hunch, or a general suspicion without articulable basis, is not enough.
If a deputy stopped your car without observing a traffic violation or having a legitimate basis for suspecting criminal activity, or detained you on the street without the required legal justification, the stop or detention itself was unlawful. Evidence discovered as a result — the controlled substance, the odor, any statements you made — can be suppressed. Without that evidence, the prosecution typically cannot proceed, and the case is dismissed.
I have won dismissal of prior controlled substance cases after successfully arguing that my client had been detained without the required legal justification — making the resulting evidence inadmissible and ending the case entirely.
The Search Was Unlawful
Even where a traffic stop or initial encounter was lawful, a search of your person, your vehicle, or your belongings requires its own independent legal basis. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches, and warrantless searches are presumptively invalid. Law enforcement must point to a recognized exception — consent, plain view, search incident to arrest, the automobile exception, or others — to justify a warrantless search.
Each exception has defined limits. Consent must be voluntary and can be withdrawn. Plain view requires that the item be immediately apparent as evidence of a crime. The automobile exception requires probable cause to believe the vehicle contains evidence of a crime. A search that exceeds the scope of the applicable exception, or that was not justified by any recognized exception, is unconstitutional — and evidence obtained through it can be suppressed.
Common issues that arise in drug possession searches include: officers conducting extended vehicle searches on the basis of an odor alone; searches of containers or areas that were outside the scope of the justification offered; searches conducted after consent was withdrawn or never given; and pat-down searches that went beyond what was justified by the officer's safety concern.
Lab Analysis and Chain of Custody
A drug possession conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the substance recovered was in fact a controlled substance. That proof comes from laboratory analysis — and laboratory analysis depends on proper collection, handling, packaging, storage, and chain of custody from the point of seizure to the point of testing.
Chain of custody problems — missing documentation, improper storage conditions, gaps in the recorded handling of the evidence — can undermine the reliability of a lab result. Lab analyst qualifications, testing methodology, and the integrity of the sample itself are all fair targets for scrutiny. In cases where the weight or identity of the substance is close to a threshold that affects the severity of the charge, these issues can be especially significant.
I have won dismissal of a prior controlled substance case by successfully arguing that the State was unable to prove that a substance seized was in fact a controlled substance.
The Prosecution Declines to Proceed
Sometimes a dismissal comes not from a court ruling but from the prosecution's own reassessment of the case. When a defense attorney identifies significant evidentiary or constitutional problems early and communicates them effectively — through pretrial correspondence or a meeting with the prosecutor — the prosecution may determine that proceeding is not a productive use of resources. This is another reason why engaging counsel before the first deadline passes matters.
How Outright Dismissals Are Pursued: Motions to Suppress and Motions to Dismiss
The constitutional problems described above — an unlawful stop, an unauthorized search — do not resolve themselves. They often must be raised through formal pretrial motions.
Motion to Suppress Evidence
A motion to suppress asks the court to exclude specific evidence from the case on the grounds that it was obtained in violation of the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. In a drug possession case, this typically targets the controlled substance itself — the single piece of evidence the prosecution must have to prove the charge. If the court grants the motion and the drugs are suppressed, the prosecution is left with nothing to prosecute. The case is effectively over.
The motion triggers an evidentiary hearing at which the arresting officer testifies and is subject to cross-examination. The officer must articulate, on the record, the factual basis for the stop, the detention, and any search that followed. That testimony is then tested against the constitutional standards that apply. Cross-examination at a suppression hearing often reveals that the officer's account does not satisfy the required legal standard, or that the officer made statements that contradict the written report.
Motion to Dismiss
A motion to dismiss asks the court to terminate the case entirely. In drug possession cases, motions to dismiss are most commonly filed when the suppression of evidence leaves the prosecution unable to prove the charge, when the charging document is legally deficient, or when a speedy trial violation has occurred.
The suppress-then-dismiss sequence is the most common procedural path to an outright dismissal: suppress the unlawfully obtained drugs; then move to dismiss on the grounds that without the suppressed evidence, the prosecution cannot carry its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Both motions must be filed before the pretrial motions deadline set by the court — a deadline that, once passed, generally cannot be extended without compelling justification. This is among the most concrete reasons why retaining experienced defense counsel as early as possible is essential.
The Second Path: Deferred Adjudication Under W.S. § 35-7-1037
The second way a Wyoming drug possession charge can be dismissed is fundamentally different from an outright dismissal. It does not result from a flaw in the government's case. Instead, it is a deferred adjudication — a negotiated resolution available to certain first-time offenders under Wyoming Statute § 35-7-1037, the drug-specific first offender statute.
How It Works
Under § 35-7-1037, a defendant who pleads guilty or is found guilty of possession of a controlled substance — or of using or being under the influence of a controlled substance under W.S. § 35-7-1039 — may, with the court's consent, have further proceedings deferred. The court does not enter a judgment of guilt. Instead, it places the defendant on probation for a period subject to terms and conditions set by the court.
If the defendant successfully completes the probationary period, the court shall discharge the defendant and dismiss the proceedings. That discharge and dismissal "shall be without adjudication of guilt and is not a conviction" for purposes of the statute or for purposes of any disqualification or disability imposed by law upon conviction — including the enhanced penalties for second and subsequent offenses under W.S. § 35-7-1038.
In practical terms: complete the deferral, and there is no conviction on your record.
Who Qualifies?
No prior drug convictions. The § 35-7-1037 deferral is specifically for persons who have not previously been convicted of any offense under Wyoming's controlled substances act, or under any statute of the United States or any other state relating to narcotic drugs, marijuana, or stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic drugs. This is a drug-specific bar — unlike the general deferral under W.S. § 7-13-301, a prior DUI or theft conviction does not disqualify you under § 35-7-1037 unless it was a drug-related conviction.
Only one deferral in a lifetime. Wyoming Statute § 35-7-1037 expressly provides that there may be only one discharge and dismissal under this section with respect to any person. If you have previously received a § 35-7-1037 deferral — or a deferral under any similar provision — you are not eligible for a second one. This is a lifetime limit. You are not disqualified if you have previously used a deferral under W.S. § 7-13-301 or a similar statute in a different jurisdiction.
The charge must be for possession or use. The § 35-7-1037 deferral applies to possession of a controlled substance charges under W.S. § 35-7-1031(c) and certain possession of marijuana charges, as well as to using or being under the influence of a controlled substance under W.S. § 35-7-1039. It does not apply to distribution, delivery, or possession with intent to deliver charges — those are more serious offenses for which this specific deferral is not available.
Court discretion applies. The statute provides that the court "may defer" proceedings — it is not automatic. The court has discretion to decline the deferral even where the defendant is technically eligible. In practice, the position of the prosecution also matters: while § 35-7-1037 does not expressly require the prosecutor's consent in the same way the general deferral under § 7-13-301 does, the court will consider the prosecutor's position, and active prosecution opposition can make a deferral harder to obtain.
Prior criminal history beyond the drug conviction bar may affect eligibility. Even where no statutory bar applies, a significant criminal history — prior misdemeanor convictions, a pattern of prior arrests, or circumstances suggesting the current offense is not genuinely isolated — can influence whether the court exercises its discretion in favor of a deferral.
How § 35-7-1037 Differs From the General § 7-13-301 Deferral
Wyoming has two first-offender deferral mechanisms, and they are separate. The general deferral under W.S. § 7-13-301 applies to any criminal charge — including DUI — while § 35-7-1037 is specific to drug possession and use. Each has its own one-time lifetime limit, applied independently.
This means: if you previously used a § 7-13-301 deferral for a DUI, you may still be eligible for a § 35-7-1037 deferral on a first drug possession charge, as long as you have no prior drug convictions. Conversely, a prior § 35-7-1037 deferral does not by itself disqualify you from a § 7-13-301 deferral for a different type of offense — though the prior history will be considered as a matter of judicial discretion.
If you are unsure which statute applies to your situation, this is exactly the kind of question that requires a case-specific analysis by an experienced defense attorney.
What the Deferral Does — and Does Not — Do
It requires a guilty or no contest plea. Unlike an outright dismissal, the § 35-7-1037 deferral requires you to admit the factual basis for the charge as a condition of entering the program. You are pleading guilty — the court simply defers entering judgment while you complete probation.
The record of arrest remains. A deferred adjudication dismissal is not an expungement. The arrest will remain on your record. What the deferral prevents is a conviction — the charge will not appear as a conviction on standard background checks, but the arrest itself may still be visible.
A completed § 35-7-1037 deferral cannot be expunged under current Wyoming law. This is a critical point that many people overlook. Wyoming Statute § 7-13-1401 expressly excludes from its expungement provisions any case in which there was a disposition pursuant to § 7-13-301 — and the same framework applies to § 35-7-1037 dispositions. The Wyoming Supreme Court's decision in Lynch v. State, 2026 WY 8, confirms that completed deferred adjudications of this type cannot be expunged under current Wyoming law. The record of the arrest and the deferral disposition will remain accessible even after the case is dismissed. Unless the legislature amends the expungement statutes, there is no mechanism to seal that record.
This distinction has lasting practical significance. A case dismissed outright — because the search was unlawful, or because the prosecution lacked evidence — may be eligible for expungement under § 7-13-1401 after 180 days. A case resolved through a § 35-7-1037 deferral is not. It is one of the most important reasons why pursuing an outright dismissal, where the evidence supports it, is worth the effort.
Probation is a real obligation. The conditions of a § 35-7-1037 deferral can include drug testing, substance abuse evaluation and treatment, community service, fines, and regular reporting to the court. Failing to comply — including a single failed drug test — can result in the deferral being revoked and the original conviction being entered. The deferral is an opportunity, not a guarantee.
It does not affect immigration status in all cases. For non-citizens, even a deferred adjudication that does not result in a formal conviction can have immigration consequences depending on the specific charge, the jurisdiction, and the individual's status. Non-citizen defendants facing drug charges should consult with an immigration attorney before entering any plea.
Which Path Applies to Your Case?
These two paths are not mutually exclusive. In many cases, the right strategy is to investigate and pursue an outright dismissal first — filing suppression motions, pressing the constitutional issues, and forcing the prosecution to defend its evidence. If that effort succeeds, the case ends without any guilty plea, any probation, and with a record that may later be expunged. If the suppression motion does not succeed but the investigation has weakened the prosecution's position, the deferral may then be negotiated from a stronger posture.
The right approach depends on the specific facts: how the encounter began, whether the search was justified, what the substance was and how it was found, your prior criminal and drug history, and whether you have previously used either deferral mechanism. These are questions that require a careful review of the actual evidence — the police report, the body camera footage, the lab results — and an honest assessment of what the law says about how that evidence was obtained.
Talk to a Local Criminal Defense Attorney
Drug possession cases can have lasting consequences to your record. If you have been charged with possession of a controlled substance in Teton County or the surrounding area, contact Teton Defense at (307_ 219-3535 for a free consultation. You will speak directly with attorney Ethan Morris — not a paralegal or an intake service — about your hearing, your exposure, and your options. Ethan Morris has won outright dismissals of drug possession cases in Teton County — including cases dismissed after successfully arguing that his client was detained without the required legal justification — and has guided first-time offenders through the § 35-7-1037 deferral process.
This post is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case is different; if you have been served with a protection order or believe you are under criminal investigation, consult an attorney about your specific situation.
