Oklahoma Appeals Court Refuses To Overturn Richard Glossip’s Conviction

Oklahoma death-row inmate Richard Glossip is dealing with one other setback in his 25-year effort to show his innocence. On Thursday, an Oklahoma appeals courtroom upheld Glossip’s homicide conviction, regardless of a request from the state’s lawyer common filed earlier this month searching for to vacate Glossip’s conviction and retry the case.

Richard Glossip was convicted for the 1997 homicide of his boss, Barry Van Treese. Nevertheless, nobody asserts that Glossip killed Van Treese himself. Prosecutors asserted that Glossip, who had been working because the supervisor of a motel owned by Van Treese, had paid Justin Sneed, a 19-year-old upkeep man, to kill Van Treese.

The one direct proof linking Glossip to the homicide got here from Sneed’s testimony—testimony that he solely agreed to present as a part of a plea deal that allowed him to flee the dying penalty for murdering Van Treese.

Glossip’s conviction was overturned in 2001 when an appeals courtroom thought “the proof at trial tending to corroborate Sneed’s testimony was extraordinarily weak.” However he was reconvicted and resentenced to dying for the crime in 2004.

Giving extra purpose to doubt Sneed’s testimony, within the years since Glossip’s conviction, Sneed has left cryptic messages hinting that he presumably wished to recant his testimony towards Glossip. In 2007, Sneed wrote to his lawyer about Glossip’s case, “There are numerous issues proper now which might be consuming at me. Somethings [sic] I want to wash up,” including that he was “going to attempt to contact the indigent protection over [Glossip’s] case or the D.A.’s.”

Within the years since his conviction, Glossip has narrowly escaped execution a number of instances, receiving 4 separate stays of execution and even being served three final meals. Nevertheless, issues began to search for for Glossip following the discharge of an unbiased investigation into his case in 2022. The report concluded that the state had intentionally destroyed proof in Glossip’s case, with investigators stating that they “uncovered further proof, by no means introduced to the jury or to any courtroom, that will probably have led to a special consequence within the case.”

Following the discharge of this report and the conclusion of a separate unbiased investigation earlier this month, Oklahoma’s Lawyer Basic Gentner Drummond introduced that he had filed a movement requesting an appeals courtroom to overturn Glossip’s conviction and searching for a brand new trial within the case.

“After thorough and critical deliberation, I’ve concluded that I can not stand behind the homicide conviction and dying sentence of Richard Glossip,” Drummond stated in a press release on April 6. “I don’t consider that justice is served by executing a person primarily based on the testimony of a compromised witness.”

Nevertheless, this wasn’t sufficient for Oklahoma’s Courtroom of Felony Appeals. On Thursday, the courtroom concluded that Glossip hadn’t offered sufficient new proof exhibiting that he wanted a brand new trial.

“This case has been completely investigated and reviewed in quite a few appeals. Glossip has been given unprecedented entry to the prosecution recordsdata, together with work product, but he has not offered this Courtroom with ample info that will persuade this Courtroom to overturn the jury’s dedication that he’s responsible,” wrote Decide David B. Lewis.

“For over 20 years, the info, proof, and legislation regarding this case have been reviewed intimately by judges and their staffs by each stage of enchantment allowed below our Structure,” concurred Decide Gary L. Lumpkin. “At no degree of evaluate has a courtroom decided error within the trial continuing of this Petitioner nor has there been a exhibiting of precise innocence.”

Regardless of the ruling, Drummond rapidly introduced that he would nonetheless refuse to permit Glossip’s execution—which is presently deliberate for Could 18—to go ahead. “Whereas I respect the Courtroom of Felony Appeals’ opinion, I’m not prepared to permit an execution to proceed regardless of so many doubts. Guaranteeing the integrity of the dying penalty calls for full certainty,” he wrote on Thursday. “I’ll completely evaluate the ruling and take into account what steps must be taken to make sure justice.”

Whereas the case towards Richard Glossip has at all times been deeply flawed, his a long time of failed makes an attempt to overturn his conviction—and his slender brushes with dying—present simply how arduous it may be to show your innocence, even when your individual state concludes that it has little proof towards you.

“It’s unconscionable for the courtroom to try to power the State to maneuver ahead together with his execution,” stated Don Knight, Glossip’s lawyer, in a Thursday assertion. “We can not allow this longstanding injustice to go unchallenged and will likely be submitting for evaluate of this manifestly unjust ruling in america Supreme Courtroom.”