Supreme Court: Amalgamating Company Loss Cannot be Set Off Against Amalgamated Income || Supreme Court: Hostile Witness Deposition Admissible to the Extent it is Found Credible and Reliable || SC Upholds Penalty on Bank For Delay in Cheque Presentation under Consumer Protection Act || Karnataka High Court Orders Strict Statewide Implementation of Menstrual Leave Policy || Delhi HC: Emergency Arbitrator Awards are Not Binding on Indian Courts in Interim Relief Proceedings || Del HC Imposes ?10L Fine on Parle Agro For Non-Disclosure of Sales Revenue in Pepsico Trademark Case || Supreme Court: Spouse Cannot Withdraw Consent for Mutual Divorce After Settlement Agreement || Supreme Court Suspends PC Act Sentence of Former Minister Anosh Ekka, Flags Overlapping CBI Cases || Supreme Court: Magistrate’s Probe Order Can’t be Quashed on Accused’s Defence || Delhi High Court: No Adverse Inference if Handwriting Sample Refused Without Section 73 Disclosure

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 :