Delhi HC: Property Disputes Between In-Laws and Daughter-In-Law are Not Exclusively For Family Court || Delhi High Court: After Probate is Granted, A Will Does Not Require Fresh Proof under Section 68 || Ker HC: Periodic Replacement and Maintenance of Prosthetic Limb Must Be Included in Compensation || Madras High Court: DNA Test Not Required For Mother to Donate Kidney to Her Son || Delhi HC: Pre-Summoning Evidence Opportunity Must be Granted Even in Civil-Natured Criminal Cases || J&K&L HC: UAPA Trials Cannot Linger and Must Proceed With Day-To-Day Hearing under NIA Act || Allahabad HC: FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Not Vitiated For Lack of Pre-Registration Hearing || Allahabad HC: FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Not Vitiated For Lack of Pre-Registration Hearing || Delhi HC: Private Schools May Increase Fees Without Prior Approval if Declared Before Session Begins || Supreme Court: Omission of Accused in Inquest Report Alone Does Not Indicate Innocence

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 :