WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court agreed on Monday to review an appeal from Richard Glossip, an Oklahoma man facing execution for a murder-for-hire plot conviction the state no longer defends.
The court has been considering some of Glossip’s many petitions for review for over a year. Its decision to hear the appeal marks the second time the high court will hear from Glossip in his fight to avoid execution for a crime he says he did not commit. Last year Oklahoma joined Glossip’s effort, stating it no longer defended his conviction.
Now the justices will decide if the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals erred in upholding his conviction.
Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate in the decision to hear the case.
During his 25 years on death row, Glossip has had his last meal three times. Only Supreme Court intervention last year stopped that number from climbing to four.
Throughout it all, Glossip has maintained his innocence. A 400-page independent review commissioned by state lawmakers found his claims were likely truthful and Oklahoma even begged the justices not to force them to do the “unthinkable” and follow through with his execution earlier this year. Even proponents of the death penalty have sided with Glossip, arguing executing an innocent man would shift their views on the punishment.
However, Glossip still sits on death row because the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals refused to accept the state’s determination that his conviction was unsustainable.
Glossip faces execution for his connection to the murder of his former employer, Barry Van Treese. At the time, Glossip worked as a manager at the Best Budget Inn property Van Treese owned in Oklahoma City.
Van Treese was murdered after Justin Sneed bludgeoned him in a room at the hotel. Sneed, who was addicted to methamphetamine, also stole thousands of dollars from Van Treese’s car.
A week after the murder, police arrested Sneed and Glossip. Investigators told Sneed they knew he committed the murder, but they thought he had help. Officers repeatedly brought up Glossip during their interview with Sneed. Detectives asked if Glossip was the mastermind behind the murder, asking, “Rich is trying to save himself by saying that you’re in this by yourself.”
Following the detectives’ leading questions, Sneed changed his story to claim Glossip told him to rob Van Treese, but not murder him. Sneed, however, would change his story again, claiming Glossip asked him to kill Van Treese.
After dropping charges against him for allegedly trying to cover up the murder, police instead arrested Glossip as Sneed’s co-defendant.
Oklahoma agreed to drop the death penalty if Glossip confessed. Sneed, who was given the same offer, agreed where Glossip did not. Sneed’s deal also included testifying against Glossip.
Sneed’s testimony was the only evidence connecting Glossip to Van Treese’s murder. A jury convicted him of the murder-for-hire plot in 1998 and the ruling was affirmed.
During one of his many appeals, Glossip was able to prove his first attorney failed to provide him with a minimal defense in 2000. His second trial, however, would be tainted by the police department.
An investigation uncovered the destruction of evidence by a 28-year veteran on the force at the direction of the district attorney’s office. The police department destroyed key evidence — including potentially exculpatory documents — in the case prior to Glossip’s second trial.
Prosecutors also interfered in the second trial, altering Sneed’s testimony when it diverged from the facts of the state’s case against Glossip. The defense attorney would not hear of the changes to Sneed’s testimony until decades later. They would also discover Sneed tried to recant his testimony.
Glossip’s second trial also ended with a death sentence.
Information about prosecution and police department interference was not the only evidence recently discovered by Glossip’s lawyers. A final box of evidence recovered only months ago included information about Sneed’s serious psychiatric disorder — a condition he possessed while testifying against Glossip. Sneed had claimed he was not seeing a psychiatrist at the time.
The mounting evidence against Glossip’s conviction led Oklahoma’s attorney general to file a motion to vacate in April. Despite this, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals upheld his conviction and the state pardon and parole board rejected his clemency request.
In May of this year, Glossip asked the Supreme Court to pause his execution in a rare unopposed emergency application.
Death penalty appeals are rarely successful at the Supreme Court. Legal experts specializing in this area say this is because of the long journey it takes cases to make it up to the justices. Often they exhaust appeal opportunities prior to new evidence being uncovered.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that when considering ineffective assistance claims, federal courts cannot consider new evidence outside of what is presented in state court.
from Courthouse News
