The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered a man from Oklahoma, convicted of murder, Richard Gladip – who is scheduled for execution nine times and served three times his “last meal” – must receive a new process, since the errors made by prosecutors are violated his constitutional rights.
The decision 5-3 notes an exceptional turn in a case, which has been observed for decades of unsuccessful appeals, including a previous unsuccessful offer before the Supreme Court, in which Glossip challenges the constitutionality of the deadly injection as a cruel and unusual punishment.
“We conclude that the prosecutor’s office violates his constitutional obligation to correct the false testimony,” writes justice Sonia Sotomayor in her opinion of his majority, citing the right to the 14th amendment to a proper process. “We revoke the decision from below and redirect the case for a new process.”
Chief Justice John Roberts and Judges Elena Kagan, Bret Cavanan and Ketanji Brown Jackson joined Sotomayor. Judges Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Amy Connie Barrett disagreed. Justice Neil Gorshuh gave up the case due to prior involvement as an appellate judge.
View of the US Supreme Court in Washington, July 19, 2024.
Kevin Mohaat/Reuters
Glossip was condemned by Oklahoma’s jury for participating in the murder of his former boss in 1997, owner of Motel Barry Van Trez, only on the certificate of the confessed killer, Justin Snyd, who later declined to have been paid by Glossip, to commit the murder. He maintained his innocence. There was no physical evidence.
Sneed – who received a lifetime sentence in exchange for a certificate against Glossip – was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and accepted psychiatric drugs, but denied it during the test – facts unjustified by prosecutors who knew the truth.
“If the prosecutor’s office adjusted a snid in the podium, his authenticity would be clearly injured,” Sotomayor wrote. “This correction would reveal to the jurors not only that Snyde is unreliable … but also that Snyd is ready to lie to them under the oath. Such a revelation would be considerable in any case and it was especially so when Snyd was already not in the idea For a strong witness. “
The Prosecutor General of the State Genter Dermond, who is a defender of the death penalty, came out strongly against the execution after examining the protocol.
“The deadly punishment is not included, you know, ideology or politics,” Drumond told ABC News last year. “This should be included in the rule of law. It was a wild unpopular position for me, but that’s the right thing.”
Dermond said he did not believe that Gladip was innocent, but that the new test was imperative.
“We are grateful that a clear majority of the court supports the long -standing precedent that prosecutors cannot hide critical evidence from defense lawyers and cannot stand until their witnesses deliberately lie to the jurors. Today it was a victory for justice and justice in our judicial system “, said Glossip’s lawyer Don Knight in a statement. “Rich Glossip, which has maintained its innocence for 27 years, will now be given the chance to have the fair process that it has always been refused.”
This photo, provided by the Oklahoma Correction Division, shows a prisoner of death Richard Glossip on February 19, 2021.
Oklahoma adjustment department via AP
The Van Trez family asked the Supreme Court to maintain Glossip’s sentence.
Justice Thomas, in writing, stated that the Supreme Court had no power to overturn the State Court of Oklahoma, which refused to give a new trial to Gladip.
“The court stretches the law of each order to rule in its favor,” Thomas wrote. “He finds a duly violation of the process based on clearly intangible testimony about the medical condition of a witness. And for the removal, he orders a new process in violation of the Black-Broad Act on the powers of that court to review decisions of the State Court.”
