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.
![Glossip v. Oklahoma, No. 22-7466 [Arg: 10.9.2024]](https://img.transistor.fm/nETuehnPqL7JKD9e5T-B7a0RSLSspOip2vmwWV2VElw/rs:fill:800:800:1/q:60/aHR0cHM6Ly9pbWct/dXBsb2FkLXByb2R1/Y3Rpb24udHJhbnNp/c3Rvci5mbS85NzNl/MzAwMjA2ZGM5MTMy/ZjllMjcyZThhM2U4/ZTQ1ZC5wbmc.webp)