WASHINGTON — On Tuesday, The U.S. Supreme Court intervened in the case of Brenda Andrew, the only woman on Oklahoma’s death row, citing concerns that the prosecution’s use of her sexual history during her trial may have unfairly influenced her conviction for the 2001 murder of her estranged husband.
In a decision issued without a signed opinion, the high court ordered the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver to revisit Andrew’s case. This comes after the federal appeals court upheld her conviction and death sentence. The justices instructed the lower court to determine whether the trial’s use of irrelevant and potentially prejudicial evidence compromised Andrew’s right to a fair trial.
Brenda Andrew was convicted for her role in the murder of Rob Andrew, an advertising executive, who was shot and killed in the family’s Oklahoma City garage. James Pavatt, Andrew’s lover, was also convicted of the murder and is currently on death row.
The Supreme Court’s decision to revisit the case centers on the argument that prosecutors improperly introduced evidence about Andrew’s sexual history, which her legal team claims unfairly swayed the jury. The justices are asking whether this evidence was “unduly prejudicial” and whether it made her trial “fundamentally unfair.”
In a dissenting opinion, Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch argued that the state had presented overwhelming evidence of Andrew’s involvement in the crime and would have left both her conviction and death sentence intact. Their dissent emphasizes the strength of the prosecution’s case and questions the need for further review.
This development adds another layer of uncertainty to Andrew’s legal battle, which has been ongoing for more than two decades. The decision to reopen her case comes at a time when concerns over the fairness of criminal trials and the use of certain evidence in courtrooms continue to make headlines across the country.
