Oklahoma – John Hanson, a man on Oklahoma’s death row, is scheduled to be executed on June 12, 2025. But a new lawsuit filed by his attorneys against the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board (OPPB), citing alleged bias and conflict of interest, may delay that date, according to Hanson’s legal team.
Hanson’s lawyers are requesting a stay of execution, arguing that his clemency hearing was fundamentally unfair due to the participation of board member Sean Malloy. Malloy previously served as a Tulsa County Assistant District Attorney from 2003 to 2006—during the period when Hanson’s resentencing was prosecuted by the Tulsa County District Attorney’s Office.
Before Hanson’s clemency hearing, his legal team asked that Malloy recuse himself due to this prior connection to the case. That request was denied. On May 7, the board voted 3–2 to deny Hanson clemency, with Malloy voting against him.
“The Oklahoma Constitution guarantees every person a fair and impartial clemency hearing. That did not happen here,” said Emma Rolls, one of Hanson’s attorneys. “A board member with direct ties to Mr. Hanson’s prosecution refused to step aside, despite clear grounds for recusal. No one facing execution should have to plead for mercy before someone connected to the case in this way. We’re asking the court to intervene and halt this execution until Mr. Hanson receives the process he’s entitled to under law.”
Hanson’s attorneys argue the hearing violated Article VI, Section 10 of the Oklahoma Constitution, which mandates that clemency applications be reviewed by five impartial board members. They also cite OPPB’s internal policy requiring members to disclose potential conflicts and recuse themselves when necessary. The legal team is asking the court to void the board’s decision and order a new, unbiased hearing while staying Hanson’s execution.
In addition to the alleged due process violations, Hanson’s attorneys point to what they describe as stark disparities between Hanson’s sentence and that of his co-defendant, Victor Miller. Despite Miller’s prior murder conviction and alleged leadership role in the crime spree that led to the killing of Mary Bowles, he received a life sentence. Hanson, who is autistic and did not present key mitigating evidence at trial, faces death.
“Mr. Hanson has spent more than two decades in federal prison for a separate conviction without a single act of violence,” his attorneys noted. “This is exactly the kind of case clemency was designed for—one marked by missing evidence, unrecognized disabilities, and deeply unequal treatment.”
The clemency petition outlines several core arguments. Hanson’s more culpable co-defendant, Victor Miller, was sentenced to life without parole, even though prosecutors initially claimed Hanson killed Bowles. According to the petition, Miller later boasted about being the actual shooter. Hanson’s attorneys argue that this sentencing disparity underscores the injustice of executing Hanson while Miller lives.
They also argue that Hanson was homeless and developmentally disabled at the time of the crime, yet the jury never heard evidence that he is autistic. His attorneys contend that this left jurors without critical context about his vulnerability to coercion by figures like Miller.
Just before Hanson’s resentencing, the state disclosed that Miller had previously confessed to killing Bowles. A trial judge ruled this new evidence warranted a new trial, but the ruling was later overturned on procedural grounds. The judge found that the evidence “creates a reasonable probability that, had it been introduced at trial, [it] would have changed the outcome” (Page 15, clemency petition).
The judge who oversaw Hanson’s resentencing later recommended life without parole, referencing new evidence, comparisons to similar cases where the death penalty was not sought, and racial dynamics—Hanson is Black and the victim was white.
Now 61, Hanson has been a model prisoner for nearly two decades. His attorneys cite praise from prison staff, including a longtime correctional counselor who described Hanson as “calm, respectful, non-disruptive,” noting that he had “a stabilizing effect on others and earned the trust of staff, which is not given lightly” (Page 135).
If granted clemency, Hanson would remain in federal custody for the rest of his life, serving a life-plus-82-year sentence. His attorneys emphasize that he poses no threat to public safety and is ineligible for parole.
Whether the courts will intervene in time remains to be seen, but Hanson’s case continues to raise pressing questions about fairness, due process, and the role of mercy in Oklahoma’s capital punishment system.
