OKLAHOMA CITY, Okla. — An Oklahoma County judge on Thursday granted bond to death row prisoner Richard Glossip, marking a dramatic turn in one of the nation’s most controversial capital punishment cases after nearly 29 years of incarceration, nine execution dates and three last meals.
District Judge Natalie Mai ordered Glossip released on $500,000 bail pending retrial proceedings after concluding the state had failed to demonstrate the level of proof required under Oklahoma law to continue holding him without bond.
The ruling comes more than a year after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Glossip’s conviction and ordered a new trial, finding prosecutorial misconduct had undermined the integrity of the case.
In a statement released Thursday, attorney Donald Knight praised the court’s decision and sharply criticized the conduct of prosecutors in the original proceedings.
“We are extremely grateful that Judge Natalie Mai has granted Richard Glossip a bond,” Knight said. “In doing so, she rejected the State’s claim that there is a strong case for guilt.”
Knight added, “For the first time in 29 years of being incarcerated for a crime he did not commit, during which he faced 9 execution dates and ate 3 last meals, Mr. Glossip now has the chance to taste freedom while his defense team continues to pursue justice on his behalf against a system that the United States Supreme Court has found to be guilty of serious misconduct by state prosecutors.”
He continued, “Mr. Glossip is deeply grateful to the many thousands of people who have expressed support for him over the years and now looks forward to the day when he is exonerated and truly free from this decades-long nightmare.”
The court order issued Thursday traces the extraordinary procedural history of the case, which began in 1997 with the murder of motel owner Barry Van Treese.
Prosecutors accused Justin Sneed of carrying out the killing and alleged Glossip orchestrated the crime. Sneed ultimately admitted to the killing and testified against Glossip in exchange for avoiding the death penalty.
According to the court order, Glossip was first convicted and sentenced to death in 1998. That conviction was overturned in 2001 by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals because of ineffective assistance of counsel.
A second trial in 2004 again resulted in a conviction and death sentence.
For years, Glossip maintained his innocence while his legal team challenged the conviction through multiple rounds of appeals and post-conviction litigation.
The case drew international attention from anti-death penalty advocates, religious leaders, lawmakers and innocence organizations, particularly after repeated revelations involving withheld evidence and questions surrounding Sneed’s testimony.
The Oklahoma court order recounts that in 2023 prosecutors released an additional eighth box of evidence to Glossip’s legal team. The newly disclosed materials allegedly showed that prosecutors failed to disclose information about Sneed’s bipolar disorder and possible false testimony.
The U.S. Supreme Court ultimately concluded that prosecutors violated constitutional standards established under Napue v. Illinois by allowing false testimony to stand uncorrected.
According to the order, the Supreme Court found “a Napue error occurred when the prosecutor knowingly allowed Sneed’s false testimony about being mistakenly prescribed lithium after his arrest to treat either dental pain (in pretrial hearing) or a cold (in Glossip 2) to go uncorrected.”
The court order further states, “The record showed that someone diagnosed Sneed with bipolar disorder while in pre-trial detention prior to Glossip 1, and prescribed lithium to Sneed to treat that psychiatric condition.”
Judge Mai’s ruling emphasized that Oklahoma law permits bail even in capital cases unless “the proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great.”
The judge wrote that bail cannot be used “as a tool of punishment” and noted that Glossip has already spent nearly three decades in custody.
The order stated, “Glossip has been in custody since January 1997, thus the Court recognizes its ongoing duty to adjudicate bail when requested to do so.”
Judge Mai also pointed to earlier appellate findings criticizing the evidentiary foundation of the state’s case.
The court noted that the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals previously found “the evidence at trial tending to corroborate Sneed’s testimony was extremely weak.”
The ruling further observed that later dissenting appellate judges argued prosecutors had “overstate[d] the strength of the accomplice corroboration evidence.”
Judge Mai ultimately concluded that the court could not constitutionally deny bail under the current evidentiary record.
“Based on the ample record at this point in time, the Court finds that it cannot deny bail to Glossip while adhering to the clear constitutional mandate,” the order states.
The judge also cited a striking statement previously made by Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond regarding the weakness of the case.
According to the order, Drummond wrote in a 2023 letter to the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board: “Although [Glossip] may be guilty of first degree murder, the record (complete with new evidence that the jury did not hear nor consider in rendering its verdict and death sentence) does not support that he is guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Judge Mai expressed hope that any future proceedings would finally produce a reliable outcome.
“The Court fully expects that the State will vigorously prosecute its case going forward and the defense will provide robust and effective representation for Glossip,” the order states. “The Court hopes that a new trial, free of error, will provide all interested parties, and the citizens of Oklahoma, the closure they deserve.”
The court imposed extensive conditions on Glossip’s release, including GPS monitoring, a nightly curfew from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m., travel restrictions and prohibitions on contact with witnesses or anyone in custody.
The ruling represents a remarkable moment in a case that has become emblematic of broader concerns about prosecutorial misconduct, wrongful convictions and the reliability of the death penalty system.
Over the years, Glossip came within hours of execution multiple times. His case drew support from conservatives, liberals, death penalty opponents and even some Republican lawmakers in Oklahoma who questioned the fairness of the proceedings.
The Supreme Court’s intervention earlier this year marked a rare rebuke in a capital case. The justices determined that prosecutors failed to correct false testimony from the state’s key witness, undermining confidence in the verdict and requiring a new trial.
Glossip’s attorneys have long argued there was no physical evidence tying him to the murder and that the state’s case depended almost entirely on the testimony of Sneed, who admitted to carrying out the killing himself.
The new bond ruling does not end the criminal proceedings against Glossip. Prosecutors may still seek to retry him for first-degree murder. However, Thursday’s decision means that, for the first time since the Clinton administration, Glossip may soon be outside prison walls while continuing to fight the charges.
The order granting bail was issued May 14 in Oklahoma County District Court.
Related background coverage includes prior reporting by the Davis Vanguard on the Supreme Court’s ruling ordering a new trial and earlier post-conviction litigation involving allegations of prosecutorial misconduct and withheld evidence.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
