Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court finds prosecutorial duty to correct false testimony in Glossop v. Oklahoma; orders new trial on remedy vote
Summary
In Glossop v. Oklahoma the Supreme Court found prosecutors breached a constitutional duty by allowing false testimony to stand (a Napue claim); the Court accepted jurisdiction and, after a split over remedy, a majority ordered a new trial. The decision highlights growing challenges from post-conviction discovery.
Jim Chance, host of the Federal Judicial Center's Term Talk podcast, convened a panel to analyze the Supreme Court's decision in Glossop v. Oklahoma, a post-conviction case in which newly disclosed documents reportedly showed a prosecution witness gave false testimony.
Laurie Levinson, a law professor and David W. Birnbaum Chair in Ethical Advocacy at Loyola Law School, summarized the case's procedural history: "Richard Glossop was convicted... [and] for 28 years asserted his innocence," and late disclosures—"about 8 boxes of new documents"—revealed…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
