By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday threw out the murder conviction and death penalty for Richard Glossip, an Oklahoma man who has steadfastly maintained his innocence and averted multiple attempts by the state to execute him.
The justices found that Glossip’s trial violated his constitutional rights because prosecutors did not turn over evidence that might have bolstered his defense.
FILE – This photo provided by the Oklahoma Department of Corrections shows death row inmate Richard Glossip on Feb. 19, 2021. (Oklahoma Department of Corrections via AP, File)
“Glossip is entitled to a new trial,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for five justices.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, voting to uphold the conviction and death sentence, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett would have allowed a state appeals court to decide how to proceed.
Justice Neil Gorsuch did not take part in the case, presumably because he participated in it at an earlier stage when he was an appeals court judge.
The justices heard arguments in October in a case that produced a rare alliance in which lawyers for Glossip and the state argued that the high court should overturn Glossip’s conviction and death sentence because he did not get a fair trial.
The victim’s relatives had told the high court that they want to see Glossip executed.
Oklahoma’s top criminal appeals court had repeatedly upheld the conviction and sentence, even after the state sided with Glossip.
Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death in the 1997 killing in Oklahoma City of his former boss, motel owner Barry Van Treese, in what prosecutors have alleged was a murder-for-hire scheme.
Glossip has always maintained his innocence. Another man, Justin Sneed, admitted robbing Van Treese and beating him to death with a baseball bat but testified he only did so after Glossip promised to pay him $10,000. Sneed received a life sentence in exchange for his testimony and was the key witness against Glossip.
In 2023, state Attorney General Gentner Drummond, a Republican, said new evidence persuaded him that Glossip’s trial was not fair. Drummond has said he does not believe Glossip is innocent and has suggested he could face a new trial.
If Glossip were to be tried again, the death penalty would be off the table, Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Zemp Behenna, a Democrat, has said.
Among Drummond’s concerns are that prosecutors knew Sneed lied on the witness stand about his psychiatric condition and his reason for taking the mood-stabilizing drug lithium. Drummond also has cited a box of evidence in the case that was destroyed, including motel receipts, a shower curtain and masking tape that Glossip’s attorney, Don Knight, said could have potentially proven Glossip’s innocence.
At least five justices voted last year to block efforts to execute Glossip while his case played out.
That was just the latest reprieve for a death row inmate who has eaten three “last meals” and been married twice while awaiting execution. Oklahoma has set execution dates nine times for Glossip.
The court faced two legal issues, whether Glossip’s rights were violated because the evidence wasn’t turned over and whether the Oklahoma court decision upholding the conviction and sentence, reached after the state’s position changed, should be allowed to stand.
The justices issued their most recent order blocking Glossip’s execution last year. They previously stopped his execution in 2015, then ruled against him by a 5-4 vote in upholding Oklahoma’s lethal-injection process. Glossip avoided execution then only because of a mix-up in the drugs that were to be used.
Glossip was initially convicted in 1998 but won a new trial ordered by a state appeals court. He was convicted again in 2004.
This story has been corrected to show Drummond’s party identification is Republican, not Democrat.
Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
Leave a Reply