Allahabad HC: Victim Compensation under POCSO Act Cannot be Withheld For Lack of Injury Report || MP HC: Diverting Goods From Delivery Point is Misappropriation under S.407 IPC || Delhi HC: Bar Associations are Not ‘State’ under Article 12 as They Do Not Perform Public Functions || Delhi HC: Pending Probate Proceedings Do Not Prevent Filing FIR For Alleged Will Forgery || Ker HC: Dismissal For Default Alone Cannot Justify Rejecting Restoration Plea For Lack of Vigilance || SC: Disclosure Statements Alone Cannot Secure Conviction Without a Complete Chain of Evidence || Supreme Court Orders Reporting of Student Suicides and Bans Denial of Classes or Exams || SC: Govt Can Exclude Overqualified Candidates From Posts Requiring Lower Qualifications || SC: Contracts to Hire Global Speakers For Media Summits are Not Taxable as Event Management Services || SC: Mandatory Injunction Suit Alone is Not Maintainable When Plaintiff’s Title is Disputed

Glossip et al. v. Gross et al - (29 Jun 2015)

Use of midazolam does not violate Eighth Amendment of Constitution

Criminal

Hearing a petition against the use of midazolam by the State of Oklahoma in carrying out the death penalty, the United States Supreme Court held that the Petitioners had failed to establish that its use would create a demonstrated risk of severe pain. It added, Oklahoma did not have access to alternatives, and the Petitioners themselves had failed to suggest a more appropriate substitute. Midazolam is the first of three drugs used in carrying out executions by lethal injection. It came to be used by State authorities after previous drugs, like sodium thiopental, used to induce a state of unconsciousness in the inmate were prevented from being used in executions.

Tags : DEATH ROW EXECUTION MIDAZOLAM

Share :