Courtney Clenney Murder Case Still Has No Firm Trial Date
Verified status of the Courtney Clenney murder case as of Aug 1, 2026: the trial date is not firm after two postponements, and the rumored 'third week of August' start is unconfirmed. Every claim links to a court order, filing, or hearing date; no AI tool is implicated.
- Jurisdiction
- Florida, USA
- Court
- Florida state court
- Judge
- Judge Wolfson
- AI tool named
- No AI tool implicated
- Ruling date
- Apr 27, 2026
- Source document
- View primary court order ↗
- Last verified
- Aug 1, 2026
Lex Machina Review is an independent risk-tracking and reference resource. Nothing on this site is legal advice, and using it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every record is reviewed against primary sources but may not reflect the most current status of a matter — always verify directly against the cited court order, rule text, or a licensed attorney before relying on it.
Companion explanation — secondary to the source document above
| Field | Verified status as of Aug. 1, 2026 |
|---|---|
| Record | State of Florida v. Courtney Clenney |
| Last verified | Aug. 1, 2026, UTC |
| Case-status flag | Pending criminal case; no firm trial date verified |
| Operational answer | No firm trial date is verified. Dec. 1, 2025 and Apr. 27, 2026 were prior settings that were pushed back; a circulating “third week of August” start is not supported by a court order, docket entry, filing, or hearing record in the available verified materials. |
| AI tool implicated | No |
For readers looking for a Courtney Clenney murder case update, the clean answer is narrower than many tracker pages make it sound: the case remains pending, but the trial date is not firm as of Aug. 1, 2026. A date that once appeared on a court calendar is not the same thing as a date that remains operative after a continuance.

Verified case posture
Clenney has been jailed without bond since her August 2022 arrest in Hawaii. She is charged with second-degree murder with a deadly weapon in the Apr. 3, 2022 stabbing death of Christian Obumseli, and she has pleaded not guilty.[1][2]
Those facts orient the record. They do not answer the calendar question. The calendar question turns on the trial-setting history: what was set, what was continued, and what is merely being repeated without a verified court basis.
The trial-setting timeline that matters
| Date or period | What the verified materials support | Current status |
|---|---|---|
| Dec. 1, 2025 | A prior trial setting. It became unreliable after both sides said they were not ready following the withdrawal of lead prosecutor Khalil Quinan.[1] | Stale; should not be treated as the current trial date. |
| Apr. 27, 2026 | A later trial setting. It was postponed on a joint continuance, with prosecutors citing more than a dozen outstanding depositions and Judge Wolfson warning that the continuance “really has to be a final continuance.”[3] | Stale; should not be treated as the current trial date. |
| Summer / August 2026 | A target period reflected in circulation after the April continuance, but the available verified materials do not supply a firm order-backed start date. | Unconfirmed as a firm trial setting. |
| “Third week of August” | A date claim circulating in unofficial YouTube, Reddit, and tracker-style discussions. The available verified materials do not tie it to a court order, docket entry, filing, or hearing record. | Unverified; should not be stated as fact. |
The Dec. 1, 2025 setting is the easiest error to preserve by repetition. It was a real setting, which is exactly why it continues to look plausible in dated summaries. But once both sides told the court they were not ready after Khalil Quinan’s withdrawal as lead prosecutor, that date no longer answered the reader’s present-tense question.[1]
The Apr. 27, 2026 setting has the same problem, only later in the sequence. It was not an invented date; it was a calendar position that was then displaced. The continuance was joint, prosecutors cited more than a dozen outstanding depositions, and Judge Wolfson warned that the continuance “really has to be a final continuance.”[3]
That warning matters, but it should not be overread. A judge’s warning that a continuance should be final is not itself a verified trial-start order. It signals the court’s tolerance for further delay; it does not convert a target window into a firm date.

Why the August claim remains unverified
The summer or August 2026 language is best treated as a target period, not a confirmed trial setting. The record available for this update supports a movement from Dec. 1, 2025, to Apr. 27, 2026, and then away from Apr. 27 after the joint continuance. It does not support stating that trial will begin in the third week of August.
This distinction is not cosmetic. Lawyers scheduling coverage, journalists planning court attendance, and readers trying to follow the case all need to know whether a date is backed by something the court actually did. A tracker entry without a corresponding order, docket entry, filing, or hearing record is not enough to make the date firm.
Unofficial discussions can be useful for finding leads, especially where mainstream coverage is scattered or stale. They are not a substitute for the step that matters here: matching the asserted case status to a dated procedural source.

Verification rule for future updates
Treat a future Courtney Clenney trial date as firm only if it is tied to one of the following:
- A court order setting trial;
- A docket entry reflecting the operative setting;
- A filing that identifies the active trial date in context;
- A hearing record in which the court sets or confirms the date.
Until then, the verified status remains: no firm trial date confirmed as of Aug. 1, 2026, and no AI tool implicated.
References
- Courtney Clenney murder case coverage, Miami Herald
- Courtney Clenney defense inspects knives at center of OnlyFans model’s murder case ahead of trial: report, Fox News
- Courtney Clenney trial continuance coverage, iHeart/WQIK, May 1
Related records
Tool profile
Browse tool evaluations →Governing regulation
The 2025 DACA Protection Bills, Provision by ProvisionPreventive workflow
Browse verification workflows →
Report a correction or tip
Spotted an outdated figure, a misstated fact, or a ruling this case record should reflect? Public comments are disabled for this content given the professional cost of a misreported case outcome, penalty amount, or rule text — use the structured correction channel instead.
Report a correction or tip for this record →