SC: Revisional Jurisdiction Cannot Correct Factual Errors Despite Alleged Concealment || Supreme Court: Wrong Statement in Pleadings is Not Always a False Statement, Perjury Case Quashed || SC: Under JJ Act, Murder Falls Within Heinous Offences; S. 302 IPC Prescribes Minimum Life Sentence || Supreme Court: Cognisance of FERA Complaint is Invalid Without Prior Notice to the Accused || Supreme Court: Terror Cases Cannot Curtail Constitutional Safeguards and the Right to Fair Trial || Supreme Court: Terror Cases Cannot Curtail Constitutional Safeguards and the Right to Fair Trial || SC Upheld Husband's Conviction For Murdering His Wife over an Extramarital Affair || J&K&L High Court: Mere Admission of Issuing Cheque is Not a Plea of Guilt under S.138 NI Act || Calcutta HC: Aadhaar Card Prima Facie Establishes Occupation; Demolition Without Notice is Unlawful || Gauhati High Court: Wildlife Law Doesn't Bar Trade in Unprotected Ornamental Fish Species

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 :