By Janelle Stecklein, Oklahoma Voice
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday tossed the murder conviction of an Oklahoma death row inmate, who has insisted he’s innocent, and ruled that he’s entitled to a new trial.
In a 5-3 decision, the Court determined that Richard Glossip’s constitutional rights were violated because prosecutors withheld evidence that would have aided in his defense and helped ensure he received a fair trial.
In an opinion for the majority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that “Glossip is entitled to a new trial” and that they were vacating the conviction. Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing in favor of upholding the verdict and sentence. Justice Neil Gorsuch did not weigh in on the decision.
It wasn’t immediately clear Tuesday if the Oklahoma County District Attorney’s Office would seek to retry Glossip.
Oklahoma County District Attorney Vicki Behenna, a Democrat, said in a statement that she had an initial conversation with Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond regarding the decision and that she “will review the entire opinion and at that time will discuss next steps together with the attorney general.” She has said Glossip would not have qualified for the death penalty under her leadership.
Drummond, a Republican, who had advocated for a new trial, said Oklahoma’s work is not done and that he plans to “visit with the family members” to determine the “most appropriate course of action to ensure that justice is secured for all involved.” Drummond said he will work with Behenna to “review the evidence with fresh eyes,” interview witnesses that are still available to them, and make a determination of whether they should seek the death penalty, a sentence of life without parole or a lesser charge.
He said that he does not believe Glossip to be innocent, but said it’s “an undeniable fact” that he didn’t receive a fair trial.
“Our justice system is greatly diminished when an individual is convicted without a fair trial, but today we can celebrate that a great injustice has been swept away,” Drummond said. “I am pleased the high court has validated my grave concerns with how this prosecution was handled, and I am thankful we now have a fresh opportunity to see that justice is done.”
Drummond said he’s instructed the Department of Corrections to continue to hold Glossip until a decision is made about how to proceed in the case. He said Glossip will be moved off death row.
He also said he’s spoken with Derek Van Treese, the son of murder victim Barry Van Treese. Drummond said Derek Van Treese is understanding of the process, but “that doesn’t diminish the pain and anguish that the family is suffering for which I am particularly acute and aware.”
In a statement, Derek Van Treese said his family has “been waiting for justice” for 10, 276 days.
“While it may be difficult to start fresh on a 28-year-old case, I urge the Attorney General and the Oklahoma County District Attorney’s Office to demonstrate the same perseverance that our family has shown throughout this process,” he said. “We pray that they exhibit the fortitude to take politics out of the equation and process this case as the death penalty case it is, and not take the easy road of a lesser charge. If they find that they are not up to the task, and unable to shoulder the burden, they should recuse themselves and allow someone with the aptitude and skill necessary to prosecute this case so it can finally be laid to rest once and for all.”
Derek Van Treese said his family remains confident that when a new trial is held, a jury will return the same guilty verdict as the first two trials.
Two juries found Glossip, 62, guilty of the 1997 murder-for-hire plot of his boss, Barry Van Treese, and sentenced him to death. Justin Sneed, an employee at the motel who admitted to beating Van Treese to death with a baseball bat, became a star witness in the trial, testifying that Glossip paid him to commit the crime. Sneed avoided the death penalty in exchange for his testimony, which was the “only direct evidence” linking Glossip to the crime, the high court wrote. Justices wrote that Glossip admitted to helping cover up the slaying, though he denied any involvement in the crime.
Drummond launched an investigation into the case, and reported that the investigator found “multiple instances of error that cast doubt on the conviction.”
Among those errors was that the state failed to disclose “eight boxes of previously withheld documents,” which included records showing that Sneed “suffered from bipolar disorder, which combined with his known drug use, could have caused impulsive outbursts of violence,” Sotomayor wrote in the opinion. She said those documents also established that a jail psychiatrist prescribed lithium to treat Sneed’s mental illness.
In an unusual union, both Glossip’s attorneys and Drummond argued that the prosecution withheld evidence that Sneed was being treated for a mental illness. They alleged that Sneed lied that he didn’t know why he was prescribed lithium and prosecutors withheld and refused to correct information that would have shown Sneed was untruthful. Both argued that the outcome might have been different had jurors known about it.
Drummond asked the state Court of Criminal Appeals in 2023 to give Glossip a new trial.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that Glossip’s attorneys either knew about the mental illness or should have, and argued that they doubted that it would have changed the outcome. They denied the request.
The U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with the ruling. Sotomayor said “prosecutors have a constitutional obligation to correct false testimony.”
Drummond said he does not intend to pursue misconduct cases against the prosecutors involved in the 25-year-old case.
Glossip had faced nine execution dates and eaten three “last meals” at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester.
Barbara Hoberock contributed to this report.
This story was updated at 4 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 25 to add comment from the Van Treese family.
