Supreme Court Orders New Trial for Oklahoma Death Row Inmate Richard Glossip

The Court ruled 6-2 that prosecutors violated Glossip's constitutional rights by withholding key evidence, overturning his conviction for the 1997 murder of Barry Van Treese.

The Supreme Court found that Oklahoma prosecutors failed to correct false testimony from their key witness, Justin Sneed, during Richard Glossip's 2004 trial.
Sneed, who admitted to killing Barry Van Treese, falsely claimed he had never received psychiatric treatment; prosecutors did not disclose their knowledge of his bipolar disorder and lithium prescription.
The Court concluded that this failure violated the precedent set in Napue v. Illinois, which prohibits the knowing use of false testimony by prosecutors.
Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond supported a retrial, citing cumulative errors in the case, though dissenting justices criticized the decision as unwarranted.
The ruling highlights flaws in Glossip's conviction, including destroyed evidence and questionable police practices, but is unlikely to set broader precedent for death penalty cases.