A man holding a sign that says "Death Penalty is Not Justice."

Glossip v. Oklahoma

Location: Oklahoma
Court Type: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Type: Amicus Curiae Brief
Status: Ongoing
Last Update: April 30, 2024

What's at Stake

This long-running Oklahoma death-penalty case raises two issues:

 

1) Will the State of Oklahoma be permitted to execute Glossip, despite overwhelming evidence that he is innocent, and despite a confession by the State’s Attorney General that the state obtained his conviction by hiding crucial evidence impeaching its star witness?; and

 

2) Will the Court reaffirm its longstanding commitment to Due-Process-Clause precedent requiring the government to disclose favorable evidence in its possession to the accused and to correct false testimony introduced against the accused?

The ACLU and the Howard University School of Law Civil Rights Clinic filed an amicus brief in support of Mr. Glossip and the (conceding) Attorney General. The brief puts Mr. Glossip’s case in the larger context of Due Process violations endemic to the office that prosecuted him, and highlights the dramatic impact similar violations have had in leading to wrongful convictions.

The brief recounts literally decades of Oklahoma prosecutors’ failures, including by the District Attorney’s Office that prosecuted Mr. Glossip, to follow the Due Process commands of and , which require disclosure to the defense of any exculpatory evidence, and oblige states to correct any knowingly false testimony presented in their case.

The brief also demonstrates the central part that such violations have had in wrongful convictions, using the National Registry of Exonerations.

Support our on-going litigation and work in the courts

Learn More About the Issues in This Case