WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court On Wednesday, he will decide whether to overturn a conviction in the slaying of inmate Richard Glossip — an unusual death penalty case in which Oklahoma’s attorney general sided with the defendant.
Glossip, now 61, was convicted in 1997 of organizing the murder of his boss at the Oklahoma City motel where they worked.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, a Republican, made a rare decision to uphold Glossip’s appeal after the case was investigated. The state disagreed with Glossip’s plea of not guilty.
If Glossip wins, the Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority that generally supports the death penalty, will order that his conviction be overturned and the case sent back to a lower court for a new trial.
The Supreme Court has previously expressed interest in Glossip’s case stepped up last year to prevent his execution. The court also blocked Glossip’s execution in separate litigation over the state’s lethal injection procedure in 2015.
Questions about Glossip’s prosecution are largely based on concerns about key statements made by 1997 killer Justin Snead. Sneed, who pleaded guilty and avoided the death penalty, testified that Glossip hired him to kill motel owner Barry Van Treese.
But it has since been revealed that prosecutors withheld information about Sneed, and it was revealed that he had lied in court.
“Newly disclosed evidence confirms that the state knew Sneed’s testimony was false and did nothing to correct it,” Glossip’s attorneys wrote in court filings.
An independent investigation commissioned by Drummond found that prosecutors knew but did not disclose that Sneed had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder at Glossip’s second trial in 2004 and was prescribed lithium after his arrest.
Sneed also falsely testified that he had never seen a psychiatrist.
Drummond concluded that because Glossip’s conviction rested substantially on Sneed’s credibility, it should not stand.
“The centrality of Sneed’s testimony to the alleged murder cannot be overstated,” Drummond’s attorneys said in court filings.
Despite Drummond’s findings, the Oklahoma appeals court defended death row last year and the state’s board of pardons and parole voted against Grant of Glossip Pardon.
Eight states, including Texas and Utah, urged the Supreme Court to uphold the Oklahoma court’s decision. Utah, joined by six other states, submitted a reference Arguing that the Supreme Court did not interfere with the case, it focused on Oklahoma state law.
Texas a separately short There is no reason for an Oklahoma court to rule in favor of an inmate simply at the state’s request, he said.
Family members Van Treese also urged the court to uphold the conviction, saying the case was a “cautionary tale” about the potential dangers of courts over-relying on a wrongful confession by a public official.
Judge Neil Gorsuch is not expected to appear in the case. The court did not give a reason, but it likely refers to his previous role as a judge on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases from the state of Oklahoma. If the court were to split 4-4, as likely as not, the state court’s decision in Glossip v. would stand.