Attorneys representing an Oklahoma man convicted and sentenced to death for arranging the baseball-bat murder of his boss 27 years ago will present argument before the U. S. Supreme Court Wednesday, claiming that he is innocent.

The Criminal Justice Legal Foundation (CJLF) has filed a brief with the high court explaining that the court does not have jurisdiction to review a state court decision based on state law. CJLF is working in collaboration with University of Utah law professor Paul Cassell, representing the victim’s family, who has filed a brief explaining that the new evidence submitted by convicted murderer Richard Glossip actually adds virtually nothing new to the case.

The case involves the 1997 murder-for-hire of Barry Van Treese, owner of the Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, by Glossip, the inn’s manager. Evidence introduced at trial indicates that Glossip, who feared he would be fired for skimming money, hired maintenance worker Justin Sneed to kill Van Treese. Glossip promised Sneed $10,000 for the killing. Both Sneed and Glossip lived at the motel. In the early hours of January 7, Van Treese, who made bi-monthly visits to review receipts and make payroll, arrived at the motel and took room 102 so he could get some sleep. Later that morning, Sneed entered the room and beat Van Treese to death with a baseball bat. A window was broken during the attack. Glossip had Sneed move Van Treese’s car to a nearby parking lot and take an envelope from under the seat, which contained $4,000 in cash for payroll and expenses. Glossip split the money with Sneed, covered the broken window, and told the housekeeper that he and Sneed would clean the downstairs rooms, including room 102 where Van Treese lay dead. Testimony at trial revealed that Glossip kept the motel staff away from that room.

Later that day, Van Treese’s car was found in a nearby credit union parking lot. A short time later police searched room 102 and found Van Treese’s body. Glossip was questioned and released. The next day Glossip was selling his possessions and preparing to leave town when police took him into custody. Subsequent searches uncovered the stolen money, and statements from motel employees conflicted with those Glossip had made. When Sneed was later arrested and confessed, Glossip was charged with murder.

While Glossip’s advocates now claim that nothing but Sneed’s testimony implicated him, his cover-up actions, possession of the cash, and untrue statements provide significant corroboration. Glossip was tried twice for the murder, and both times different juries found him guilty and sentenced him to death. In 2007, Glossip’s conviction and sentence were upheld by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA). In 2015, Glossip lost a U. S. Supreme Court challenge to Oklahoma’s lethal injection execution protocol in the case of Glossip v. Gross (a CJLF victory). Glossip was finally set to be executed in early 2023.

In January 2023, Oklahoma’s newly elected Attorney General Gentner Drummond was sworn in. A short time later, Drummond, who had claimed to support capital punishment, announced a slowdown to Oklahoma’s execution schedule, citing the stress the schedule caused Oklahoma Department of Correction’s staff. In March, he announced his office would seek to stay Glossip’s execution until 2024 to allow an independent counsel time to review the case. Drummond then appointed a political supporter with limited capital case experience as independent counsel to conduct the review.

In April, the independent counsel reported the discovery of new evidence that undermined the validity of Glossip’s conviction. The supposedly new evidence was that Sneed had a low IQ and mental health problems and that prosecutors allegedly concealed this information. Armed with this supposedly new evidence, Glossip filed his fifth habeas corpus petition asking the OCCA to overturn his conviction, and Attorney General Drummond filed a response asking that the OCCA vacate Glossip’s conviction and send his case back for a new trial. On April 20, 2023, the OCCA, after fully reviewing Glossip’s claim, denied it, again upholding his conviction and sentence. Glossip appealed that holding to the U. S. Supreme Court, again with argument in support from Attorney General Drummond and the anti-death penalty Innocence Project.

In CJLF’s brief, CJLF Legal Director Kent Scheidegger argues that the new evidence about Sneed’s mental condition added nothing material that was not already known or easily discovered at the time of the trial. Prior to trial, Sneed was examined by a psychiatrist for competence, and his mental health and his prescription for lithium were disclosed to the defense. This was even presented in Glossip’s own appeal of his conviction in 1998. The standard reference for prescription drugs at the time of the trial indicated that lithium is prescribed for bipolar disorder and not for any physical ailments. It is highly likely that Glossip’s defense counsel chose not to focus on Sneed’s mental health at trial because it would demonstrate to jurors Sneed’s vulnerability to Glossip’s manipulation and control.

The new evidence adds so little that the OCCA was clearly correct in holding that it fails to qualify for Oklahoma’s law on repeated attacks on a capital judgment, which parallels federal law. The brief encouraged the Supreme Court to let the Oklahoma court’s decision stand.

The U. S. Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review a state court decision that is based on state law. The fact that the state’s new Attorney General has joined the anti-death penalty Innocence Project to argue on behalf of this murderer raises questions about his commitment to justice, but it should not influence the validity of the state court decision or Glossip’s conviction.

“During this time, the Van Treese family has been made to suffer while waiting for justice to be served. It is time to put an end to their ordeal,” said Scheidegger.