The defense previously filed a motion to close portions, if not all, of the preliminary hearing, testimony and sealed exhibits, arguing that the publicity stemming from the hearing would likely prejudice Robinson’s right to a fair trial. Oral arguments were heard on the issue during a May 19 hearing.

Graf said Monday the motion did not show sufficient evidence that evidence presented in the preliminary hearing would realistically prejudice Robinson’s right to a fair trial. He said the motion raised generalized concerns regarding hearsay and did not identify particular evidence that warranted closure.

“Furthermore, much of the evidence the state indicated it intends to offer during the preliminary hearing is already in the public arena and was identified in the information and probable cause statement,” Graf said.

Robinson is charged with the murder of Charlie Kirk on Sept. 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University in Orem. The state is pursuing the death penalty against Robinson.

The preliminary hearing was originally scheduled for May but was pushed back to July 6-10. Graf’s ruling on the hearing was the second of two made Monday.

Graf granted the first motion, the defense’s request that County Attorney Jeff Gray and Utah County Deputy Attorney Chris Ballard show cause why they should not be held in contempt for violating the pretrial and trial publicity order.

“The issuance of this order reflects a determination that defendant has made a sufficient preliminary showing under Utah law to warrant further proceedings and does not constitute a finding of contempt,” Graf said.

The defense alleged the county prosecutors violated the pretrial publicity order by responding to media outlets about a claim from the defense in the March 27 motion that an ATF ballistics report was “unable to identify the bullet recovered at autopsy to the rifle allegedly tied to Mr. Robinson.”

The state responded that it was setting the record straight in the face of “unduly prejudicial publicity,” claiming the defense had misstated the results of the ATF analysis.

An evidentiary hearing will take place June 12 to determine whether the attorneys will be held in contempt. Each side will have 90 minutes to present evidence.