The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of Richard Eugene Glossip on Oct. 9. He has been on Oklahoma’s death row since 1998 when he was convicted of hiring motel maintenance man Justin Sneed to murder their employer, motel owner Barry van Treese.
Glossip will ask the high court to order the new murder trial that Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond says the former motel manager deserves.
The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals says Glossip has been given all the second chances the law allows.
On April 20, 2023, the court ruled that after two trials, five appeals, and two reprieves, Glossip had exhausted his legal options under Oklahoma’s Post Conviction Relief Act.
“Glossip is neither entitled to post-conviction relief nor a stay of execution,” the appeals court decision reads.
Glossip’s case drew national attention in May 2023 after Drummond—who was not in office when Glossip was convicted—publicly opposed Glossip’s execution, which at that time was set for May 18, 2023.
In an email to The Epoch Times, Drummond said Glossip’s prosecution contained “grievous” errors.
Drummond said that after reviewing the case, he determined the guilty verdict and death sentence should be set aside and the case returned to the lower court.
“It is critical for Oklahomans to have absolute faith that the death penalty is administered correctly and with certainty. That is why it is appropriate for the U.S. Supreme Court to review this case,” Drummond stated.
According to court records, Sneed was sentenced to life without parole in exchange for testifying against Glossip.
At the time of the murder, Sneed was a 19-year-old roofer and methamphetamine addict that Glossip had hired to work at the motel. Sneed told police Glossip thought Van Treese suspected him of embezzlement.
A video of Sneed’s interview was posted to YouTube by a group called SaveRichardGlossip.
Glossip’s argument to the Supreme Court is based on notes by prosecutors Connie Smotherman and Gary Ackley from a discussion they had with Sneed, said Glossip’s defense lawyer, Don Knight, of Littleton, Colorado.
“Our briefs surround notes that were found in a box of documents,” Knight told The Epoch Times. “It’s clearly information that is material to the defense and should have been disclosed.”
He said the notes show that the state withheld evidence that Sneed had been treated for mental illness and was prescribed Lithium while in jail.
In a friend of the court brief, the Van Treese family claims that Drummond is ignoring or misinterpreting evidence against Glossip.
In the brief, the family states that the notes actually show that Glossip’s defense team already had the information.
“The notes written by [prosecutors] simply record what Sneed told the prosecutors about questions from Glossip’s defense team,” the brief reads.
“I’ve spent over half my life waiting for justice to be served to those responsible [for the murder],” he said.
At the hearing, Drummond said he believes Glossip is guilty of something, but not a capital crime.
The Philadelphia-based law firm of Reed Smith was hired by an ad hoc committee of 34 Oklahoma legislators from both sides of the aisle.
Knight said the prosecution portrayed Sneed to both juries as an easily manipulated drug addict.
In the 1997 interview, Sneed told police that Glossip had helped conceal the crime by taping a shower curtain over a broken window and then replacing the window with plexiglass.
He also claimed that Glossip divided money stolen from Van Treese between them after the murder.
The Oklahoma Court of Appeals reversed Glossip’s conviction in 2001 based on ineffective counsel. He was convicted and sentenced to death a second time in 2004.
His first execution date was in 2014, but there was a moratorium on executions in Oklahoma after the botched April 29, 2014, execution of Clayton Lockett.
Lockett reportedly began moving on the gurney during the execution. According to court records it took Lockett 43 minutes to die.
Glossip was granted other reprieves as witnesses came forward with claims that he was not involved in the murder or with allegations of wrongdoing by police and prosecutors.
Drummond told the Pardon and Parole Board there were too many questions to justify the death penalty in Glossip’s case.
“I do not believe that the evidence presents that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and that is my concern,” Drummond told the board.
“We are here to see that justice is done.”
As he prepares to take Glossip’s case before the nation’s highest court, Knight credits Drummond for speaking up and helping to provide Glossip with what could be his final chance at a new trial.
Knight said that it’s almost unheard of for a state official to admit error.
“He had a lot of courage,” Knight said.
