His murder conviction was thrown out, but Richard Glossip will stay in prison while he waits for a new trial, judge rules
District Judge Heather Coyle said in the order that the 'State has sufficiently shown by clear and convincing evidence that the presumption of the defendant's guilt of a capital offense is great.'
The order comes after a hearing on Glossip's motion to set bond on June 17.
Glossip's attorney declined to comment on the judge's decision Wednesday.
The ruling is the latest twist in the legal saga surrounding Glossip, who has been scheduled for execution nine times and has eaten his last meal three times only to have his execution stayed.
After nearly three decades maintaining his innocence on Oklahoma's death row and the emergence of new evidence in recent years, the US Supreme Court in February tossed Glossip's conviction and death sentence. The Glossip case is arguably the highest-profile death penalty case to reach the court in years.
The court ordered that Glossip receive a new trial, finding prosecutors failed to correct false testimony that may have influenced his jury. Then, Oklahoma prosecutors said last month they would retry the longtime death row inmate a third time for his role in the killing of his former boss.
Since Glossip's 1998 conviction as the alleged orchestrator of a murder-for-hire scheme targeting his boss, Oklahoma City motel owner Barry Van Treese, a raft of issues with his prosecution has surfaced, coinciding with a shift of political winds now at the inmate's back.
The fight to spare Glossip's life – which has drawn national attention – has been largely helmed by pro-death penalty Republicans, most notably Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond: He and others have said it's important Oklahomans have faith the death penalty is fairly administrated, and that Glossip's execution would erode trust in the state's justice system, given the questions surrounding his case.
Drummond in June announced that he intends to pursue a new murder trial against Glossip on a first-degree murder charge. Drummond said that he would seek a sentence of life in prison for Glossip instead of the death penalty.
Allegations surfaced that the state withheld evidence related to its star witness.
Glossip's conviction rested on testimony from Van Treese's actual killer, Justin Sneed, who got a life sentence in exchange for a guilty plea and for testifying against Glossip. Sneed's testimony was the sole evidence linking Glossip, the motel's manager, to the killing.
In its February decision, the Supreme Court found prosecutors had not corrected false testimony Sneed provided at trial; had they, his credibility would have suffered, undercutting his testimony – the lodestar of the prosecution's case.
Years after Sneed's testimony, the state disclosed evidence that Sneed was treated for a serious psychiatric condition. The notes indicate prosecutors knew that Sneed's diagnosis and treatment at the time of Glossip's trial and, according to Glossip's supporters, hid that information from his defense.
This is a developing story and will be updated.
CNN's Dakin Andone contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
23 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Officials Seek Terrorism Charge After Suspect Attacks People Inside Walmart
Officials took a suspect into custody after at least 11 people were stabbed and injured in a Michigan Walmart store. The motive remains under investigation, police said. Photo: Ryan Sun/AP
Forbes
23 minutes ago
- Forbes
Federal Court Strikes Down California's Ammo Background Check Law
In a major victory for the Second Amendment, on Thursday, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals struck down a first-of-its-kind law that required a background check before every purchase of ammunition in California. 'By subjecting Californians to background checks for all ammunition purchases,' Judge Sandra Ikuta wrote for the majority in Rhode v. Bonta, 'California's ammunition background check regime infringes on the fundamental right to keep and bear arms.' PETALUMA, CA - APRIL 02: Rounds of .223 rifle ammuntion sits on the counter at Sportsmans Arms on ... More April 2, 2013 in Petaluma, California. (Photo Illustration by) California's regime dates back to 2016, when California voters approved Proposition 63 by a margin of almost 2:1. Under the proposition, residents would pass an initial background check and then receive a four-year permit to purchase ammunition. However, California lawmakers amended the law to only allow ammunition purchases in-person and after a background check each time. By requiring face-to-face transactions, California also banned both online sales and prohibited Californians from buying ammunition out-of-state. Prior to California's regime taking effect in July 2019, multiple plaintiffs, including Olympic gold medalist Kim Rhode and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, sued the state in 2018. To determine if California's law was constitutional under the Second Amendment, the Ninth Circuit relied on a two-step test set by the Supreme Court in its 2022 landmark ruling, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. Under that decision's framework, 'when the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct.' If so, the government must then show that 'the regulation is consistent with this nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.' In the California case, the Ninth Circuit determined that the Second Amendment protects 'operable' arms, and 'because arms are inoperable without ammunition, the right to keep and bear arms necessarily encompasses the right to have ammunition.' As a result, the court concluded that 'California's ammunition background check meaningfully constrains the right to keep operable arms.' To survive the second step of the Bruen test, California attempted to compare its background check system to a wide range of historical analogues, including loyalty oaths and disarmament provisions from the American Revolution and Reconstruction. But the Ninth Circuit was left unconvinced. 'None of the historical analogues proffered by California is within the relevant time frame, or is relevantly similar to California's ammunition background check regime,' Ikuta found, and so, 'California's ammunition background check regime does not survive scrutiny under the two-step Bruen analysis.' In a sharply worded dissent, Judge Jay Bybee blasted the majority's analysis as 'twice-flawed.' Noting that 'the vast majority of its checks cost one dollar and impose less than one minute of delay,' Judge Bybee asserted that California's background check system is 'not the kind of heavy-handed regulation that meaningfully constrains the right to keep and bear arms.' Notably, the California Department of Justice in 2024 received 191 reports of ammunition purchases from 'armed and prohibited individuals' who were denied by background check. In dueling statements, the California Rifle & Pistol Association praised Thursday's ruling against the state's background check law as a 'massive victory for gun owners in California,' while Gov. Gavin Newsom called the decision a 'slap in the face.'
CBS News
23 minutes ago
- CBS News
Detroit police emphasizing city curfew after car fires, alleged accidental shooting
Detroit police are reinforcing their message to residents and parents that all teenagers need to be off the streets before the city's curfew as police investigate two incidents — an alleged accidental shooting and car fires at two auto body shops. "It's just something that can be controlled, you know, the parents need to step up and take responsibility," Commander John Svec with the Detroit Police Department said. Around 11:30 p.m. Friday, officers were called to the hospital for a report of a 15-year-old shot themselves in the hand, according to police. That teenager was given a ticket for a curfew violation, and his parents were given a ticket for parental responsibility. "His parents didn't know who he was with, how he got access to a firearm. He's a young man who shouldn't have been on the streets, and he definitely shouldn't have been handling a weapon," Svec said. At 1 a.m. on Saturday, police say a 13-year-old boy was responsible for damaging four vehicles with fire at two different auto collision shops on the city's west side. Captain Marcus Thirkill said that, while police are still investigating the fires, this would've never happened if families had followed the city's curfew. "We understand, I understand as a father, it's not easy knowing where your kid is at all times, but we're really asking parents to hone in, to know the location of your kids after curfew hours," Thirkill said. Since July 8, there have been over 140 juvenile curfew violations, police said. Officials are reiterating that anyone 15 years old or younger needs to be off city streets by 10 p.m., and anyone between the ages of 16 and 17 by 11 p.m.
