OKLAHOMA - On Tuesday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of convicted murderer Brenda Andrew, throwing her 2004 conviction back to a lower court. The lower court must decide whether Andrew received a fair trial after state prosecutors referred to her as a "slut puppy" and displayed her thong underwear to a jury. Brenda Andrew/Mugshot provided by the Oklahoma Department of Corrections Meet Brenda Andrew; Oklahoma’s only woman on death row At Andrew’s trial, the prosecution sought to prove that Andrew had conspired with James Pavatt, an insurance agent, to murder her husband, Rob Andrew, for his life insurance proceeds. She was convicted of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder in the Nov. 2001 and was sentenced to death. The 29-page Supreme Court ruling details how Rob Andrew was fatally shot in the family’s garage on Nov. 20, 2001, while picking up his children for visitation. Andrew fled with Pavatt and her two children to Mexico instead of taking the children to their father’s funeral. They spent almost three months on the run and were eventually taken into custody at the Mexico border when they tried to reenter the United States. Pavatt confessed to killing Andrew's husband and denied that she was involved. He was also sentenced to death, but no execution date has been set.    Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch wrote dissenting opinions, saying "(T)he State presented 'overwhelming evidence' that Andrew participated in the murder of her husband." At the heart of the Supreme Court decision is how state prosecutors used Andrew's sexual behaviors to convict her, including displaying the former Sunday School teacher's “thong underwear” to the jury. Prosecutors also told the jury of Andrew’s alleged affairs during college and how she was “keeping a boyfriend on the side.” At the time of the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeal's decision, clearly established law provided that the Due Process Clause forbids the introduction of evidence so unduly prejudicial as to render a criminal trial fundamentally unfair. This Court accordingly ... vacates the judgment ... and remands the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.It is so ordered.SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATESNo. 23–6573. Decided January 21, 2025 "The ruling states, "Among other things, the prosecution elicited testimony about Andrew’s sexual partners reaching back two decades; about the outfits she wore to dinner or during grocery runs; about the underwear she packed for vacation; and about how often she had sex in her car." The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals held that admission of evidence about Andrew’s extramarital affairs had been proper because it showed that Pavitt was "just the last in a long line of men that she seduced.” Shooting Details Information provided by the Supreme Court ruling Rob came to pick up the children for the Thanksgiving holiday. During the pick-up, Brenda asked Rob to go into the garage to help her light the pilot light of her furnace. As he started to do so, someone pointed a 16-gauge shotgun at him from across the garage. Seeing this, Rob turned and grabbed a trash bag filled with aluminum cans, apparently in a desperate attempt to protect himself. The perpetrator shot him through the bag. Reloading the shotgun, the perpetrator (or an accomplice) then moved within three feet of Rob and shot him a second time as he lay on the floor. Brenda Andrew was also shot with a .22-caliber weapon but suffered only a superficial wound to her arm. Brenda called 911 after the shootings, claiming that two masked men had come into the garage and attacked her and Rob. She related on the call that Rob was still conscious and trying to speak. By the time emergency responders arrived, however, he was dead. During the shootings, the children were in the master bedroom watching television with the volume turned up high, unaware of what was happening in the garage. An ambulance then took Andrew to the hospital, where witnesses described her demeanor as unusually calm.