Stephens County district attorney responds to lawsuit in Glossip death row case

DUNCAN — District 6 District Attorney Jason Hicks is being sued by an Oklahoma State Representative and another person for allegations he’s withheld materials under the Open Records Act pertaining to a high-profile death row case.

The suit was filed Dec. 20, 2023, by Oklahoma 12th District Rep. Kevin McDugle and District 19th Rep. Justin Humphrey, acting as a private citizen, in Stephens County District Court against Hicks.

According to the allegations, Hicks didn’t turn over all requested open records requested from the Oklahoma District Attorneys Council pertaining to the case of death row inmate Richard Glossip, 61, during his April 26, 2023, clemency hearing.

Hicks’ filed a motion to dismiss the case due to arguments the plaintiffs lacked standing. The case was denied Wednesday by Stephens County District Judge Brent Russell.

In his motion to dismiss, Hicks state the plaintiffs never requested any records and were never denied any records prior to the filing and he called the case “clearly frivolous.”

Following Russell’s ruling, Hicks issued a statement that following Glossip’s clemency hearing, anti-death penalty lawyers made an Open Records request to him and that they were released to Glossip’s attorneys. Others records not subject to the Open Records Act and “clearly not relevant” to Glossip’s case or related to State business were withheld.

Hicks stated the lawsuit filed by McDugle and Humphrey accuses Hicks of of somehow trying to influence or even deny Glossip’s due process rights at the clemency hearing, a hearing in which Hicks did not have jurisdiction or authority to act since the case originated in another county outside his district.

“The allegations and accusations in the lawsuit are pure fiction, and they are not true,” Hicks said.

Hicks stated he chose to release the handful of records requested by McDugle and Humphrey which are not subject to the Open Records Act.

In releasing these records, Hicks noted: “There is nothing to hide. There is nothing in any record, or other communication that shows I was engaged in any sort of effort to somehow deprive Mr. Glossip, or anyone else for that matter, of a fair commutation hearing at the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board. I went to the hearing just as any other citizen could have done to simply support the victim’s family and to show them there were people who would stand with them in their fight for justice. They have endured untold suffering from the devastating loss of their loved one. They are entitled to be treated with respect and dignity, and that’s what I tried to do.”

Hicks is calling on McDugle and Humphrey to be transparent and do the same and release all their communications related to the Glossip case.

“The time has come for this issue to be put to rest as the family of Barry Van Treese has suffered enough.,” Hicks said. “I believe the citizens of Oklahoma deserve to know how their government operates, which includes all branches of government including the legislative branch.”

Hicks stated that some of the records he has released include his opinions and comments which he is entitled to make under the First Amendment.

“Some of these opinions were understandably expressed in frustration and anger and were never intended to be made public,” he said. “In addition, some of the records contain redactions which have nothing to do with the Glossip matter. The redactions were simply of conversations from other dates and times but had to be included simply because there was no way to screenshot the text messages without including unrelated, irrelevant material.”

Hicks commented on a recently published news story that incorrectly stated he was somehow involved in the Glossip prosecution.

“I’m grateful that News 12, KXII corrected its previously published news story and article and set the record straight,” he said. “I was not involved in any way with the prosecution, and I certainly have not communicated with any witness in the case. Stating otherwise is simply untrue.”

The next hearing in the civil case has not been scheduled.