Glossip v. State, 157 P.3d 143 (Okla. Crim. App. 2007)

Cases | Glossip v. State, 157 P.3d 143 (Okla. Crim. App. 2007) | 2018

The defendant paid another man to murder the owner of the Best Budget Inn, where the defendant worked. The defendant was convicted of murder and was sentenced to death. On appeal, he argued, among other things, that “victim impact evidence” and “victim impact statements” are not the same thing and that the trial court erred when it allowed an immediate family member to read her own statements and those of other immediate family members. The court of appeals held that because the issue was not preserved for appeal, it could only examine for plain error and that, since the defendant was “not harmed by the State’s utilization of two family members to read the statements of five others,” there was no plain error. The judgment and sentence were affirmed.