Del. HC Stresses Mandatory Legal Assistance to Preserve Fairness and Integrity of Criminal Trials || Supreme Court: Delhi High Court Ruling upheld on Taekwondo National Sports Federation Recognition || SC: Blockchain-Based Digitisation of Land Records Necessary to Reduce Property Document Litigation || Supreme Court to NCLT : Limit Power to Decide Intellectual Property Title Disputes under IBC || Bombay HC: Railway Employee With Valid Privilege Pass is Bona Fide Passenger Despite Missing Entries || Delhi High Court: Mere Pleadings Made To Prosecute or Defend a Case Do Not Amount To Defamation || Delhi High Court: Asking an Accused To Cross-Examine a Witness Without Legal Aid Vitiates The Trial || Delhi High Court: Recruitment Notice Error Creates No Appointment Right Without Vacancy || Supreme Court: Subordinate Legislation Takes Effect Only From its Publication in The Official Gazette || Supreme Court: DDA Must Adopt a Litigation Policy To Screen Cases and Avoid Unnecessary Filings

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 :