Supreme Court: Inclusion in Revised Select List Does Not Give TN MV Inspectors a Vested Right || Bombay HC: ICC Cannot Hear Sexual Harassment Complaint over Non-Employer Transport Incident || Ker HC Upholds Rule that Homeopathic Doctors Must Cancel Registration Before Enrolment as Advocates || J&K&L HC: Evidence Negating Penetration Warrants Conviction For Attempt to Rape, Not Rape || Karnataka High Court Rules on Daughter’s Coparcenary Rights in Grandfather’s Self-Acquired Property || Madhya Pradesh HC: Police Can be Prosecuted for Custodial Violence Without Prior Sanction || AP HP Criticized Authorities and Ordered Removal of an Ex-Serviceman’s Land From the Prohibited List || Kerala High Court Upheld the Conviction of a Madrasa Teacher in a Child Sexual Assault Case || Gauhati High Court: Pending Criminal Case Cannot Indefinitely Delay an MBBS Pass Certificate || SC Took Suo Motu Action and Directed Odisha to Aid a Visually Impaired Man and His Mother

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 :