Montana Supreme Court Rules Media Can Weigh In on Sealed Documents in Homicide Case

The court found the district court erred in blocking media outlets from intervening in the high-profile case against Michael Paul Brown.

Apr. 2, 2026 at 5:01pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

The Montana Supreme Court has ordered a district court to allow a coalition of media outlets to weigh in on public access to documents in the homicide case against Michael Paul Brown, who is charged with fatally shooting four people in Anaconda last summer. The high court found the district court made errors in sealing all case records and blocking the media's request to intervene.

Why it matters

This ruling upholds the media's constitutional right to access court proceedings and documents, which is crucial for ensuring transparency in the justice system, especially in high-profile criminal cases that have generated significant public interest and scrutiny.

The details

The Montana Supreme Court panel determined the district court judge, Jeffrey Dahood, incorrectly sealed all documents and proceedings in the case against Brown before allowing the media to object. The high court said Dahood's decision to block the media's intervention was a 'fundamental misunderstanding of governing law.' The Supreme Court noted state law and precedent require courts to balance the public's right to know with the defendant's right to a fair trial, and to seek voluntary cooperation from the media and hold hearings before sealing records.

  • On August 2025, the shooting took place inside The Owl Bar in Anaconda, Montana.
  • In the week after the shooting, the district court granted a motion to seal all documents in the case against Brown.
  • On January 2026, media outlets, including Montana Free Press, sought to intervene in the case to argue against the sealed records.
  • On March 24, 2026, the Montana Supreme Court ordered the district court to allow the media coalition to weigh in on public access to the case documents.
  • Brown's next status hearing is scheduled for May 2026 as he undergoes treatment to determine if he is fit to stand trial.

The players

Michael Paul Brown

The man charged with fatally shooting four people in Anaconda, Montana in August 2025.

Judge Jeffrey Dahood

The district court judge who initially sealed all documents and proceedings in the case against Brown.

Montana Free Press

One of the media outlets that sought to intervene in the case to argue against the sealed records.

Constance Van Kley

A constitutional law professor at the University of Montana who commented on the Supreme Court's ruling.

Morgan Smith

The Anaconda-Deer Lodge County Attorney who argued in favor of sealing numerous documents in the case.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“The Montana Supreme Court determined that there was an error of law, a mistake of law, that justified its intervention, but it didn't outright order the release of information because that's the role of the District Court.”

— Constance Van Kley, Constitutional law professor, University of Montana

“So it's not as if it's an absolute right to information, but generally, the information that's in the proceedings and the court hearings [or] trial, those things are presumptively open to the press and to the public.”

— Constance Van Kley, Constitutional law professor, University of Montana

What’s next

The media coalition plans to meet with their attorney in the coming days to discuss the next steps following the Supreme Court's ruling. Brown's next status hearing is scheduled for May 2026 as he undergoes treatment to determine if he is fit to stand trial.

The takeaway

This case highlights the importance of balancing the public's right to know with a defendant's right to a fair trial, and the critical role of the media in upholding transparency in the justice system, even in high-profile criminal cases that generate significant public interest.