Richard Glossip,
Photo courtesy of Don Knight.
On May 14, 2026, an Oklahoma judge granted bail for former death-sentenced prisoner Richard Glossip nearly three decades after his arrest and initial conviction. He was released hours later. In her order, Oklahoma County District Judge Natalie Mai set Mr. Glossip’s bail at $500,000, and set conditions for monitoring and behavior if he posted bail ahead of his retrial. Mr. Glossip was released after posting bail and told reporters outside the jail that he is “just really happy” and thankful for his wife and attorneys.
In her order, Judge Mai considered the extensive record and determined “that [the court] cannot deny bail to [Mr.] Glossip while adhering to the clear and constitutional mandate” outlined by the Oklahoma Constitution and with Attorney General Gentner Drummond’s 2023 acknowledgement that evidence “does not support that he is guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt.” Judge Mai noted that “the [c]ourt expects that the State will rigorously prosecute its case going forward and the defense will provide robust and effective representation for Glossip.” She added, “The Court hopes that a new trial, free of error, will provide all interested parties, and the citizens of Oklahoma, the closure they deserve.”
In February 2025, the United States Supreme Court threw out Mr. Glossip’s 2004 conviction for arranging the murder of Barry Van Treese and ordered a new trial because prosecutors allowed a key witness to lie in court and withheld crucial evidence about the same witness. In June 2025, AG Drummond announced his office would retry Mr. Glossip for first-degree murder but would not seek the death penalty.
In response to Judge Mai’s order, counsel for Mr. Glossip, Don Knight, said his team is “extremely grateful” for her decision. “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 was given 3 last meals, Mr. Glossip now has the chance to taste freedom while his defense team continues to pursue justice on his behalf…” Mr. Knight added that “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.”
Mr. Glossip has consistently maintained his innocence in the 1997 “murder-for-hire” of Barry Van Treese, his boss at an Oklahoma City motel. Justin Sneed, a coworker of Mr. Glossip’s, confessed to killing Mr. Van Treese but testified at trial that Mr. Glossip paid him to do so and helped cover up the killing. Mr. Sneed was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for his involvement in the murder. Mr. Glossip was first sentenced to death in 1998, but his conviction was overturned in 2001. In 2004, the state again pursued a death sentence, and a jury sentenced him to death. According to the 2025 Supreme Court decision, prosecutors knew that Mr. Sneed lied at trial about being treated for a mental health condition and did not disclose that he was taking lithium for bipolar disorder. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for the majority that “had the prosecution corrected Sneed on the stand, his credibility plainly would have suffered. The correction would have revealed to the jury not just that Sneed was untrustworthy (as amicus point out, the jury already knew he lied to the police), but also that Sneed was willing to lie to them under oath.”
In July 2025, counsel for Mr. Glossip argued in filings that AG Drummond broke a written agreement which would have allowed Mr. Glossip to enter a plea deal that would have resulted in his immediate release, had the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) overturned his conviction in 2023. The deal would have given Mr. Glossip a 45-year-sentence with credit for time served and good behavior, making him immediately eligible for release, as his sentence would have been completed in 2016. OCCA did not overturn Mr. Glossip’s conviction, prompting the joint request for intervention from the Supreme Court. The litigation surrounding this plea agreement remains pending.
