Glossip v. Oklahoma, No. 22-7466 [Arg: 10.9.2024]

QUESTION PRESENTED:

• (1) Whether the state’s suppression of the key prosecution witness’ admission that he was under the care of a psychiatrist and failure to correct that witness’ false testimony about that care and related diagnosis violate the due process of law under Brady v. Maryland and Napue v. Illinois; 
• (2) whether the entirety of the suppressed evidence must be considered when assessing the materiality of Brady and Napue claims; 
• (3) whether due process of law requires reversal where a capital conviction is so infected with errors that the state no longer seeks to defend it; and 
• (4) whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals' holding that the Oklahoma Post-Conviction Procedure Act precluded post-conviction relief is an adequate and independent state-law ground for the judgment. 

★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★