The Supreme Court is set to reconsider the case of Richard Glossip, a death row inmate in Oklahoma who has maintained his innocence for over two decades. Glossip was convicted for the 1997 murder of his former boss, Barry Van Treese, in what prosecutors alleged was a murder-for-hire plot. The key witness against Glossip, Justin Sneed, received a life sentence in exchange for his testimony.
New evidence that emerged last year has raised concerns about the fairness of Glossip's trial. Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond has acknowledged that crucial evidence, including information about Sneed's psychiatric condition, was not disclosed to the defense. Additionally, a box of evidence in the case was destroyed, potentially impacting Glossip's defense.
The Supreme Court will address two legal issues in this case. Firstly, whether Glossip's rights were violated due to the failure to provide critical evidence, and secondly, whether the Oklahoma court's decision to uphold the conviction should stand in light of the new evidence.
Several other death penalty cases in Alabama and Texas have also raised similar concerns, with prosecutors advocating for new trials or clemency for the inmates. The involvement of high-profile attorneys on both sides underscores the significance of this case.
Justice Neil Gorsuch is recused from the case due to his prior involvement at an earlier stage. A decision on Glossip's fate is anticipated by early summer, following the Supreme Court's deliberations.
