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 || J&K&L HC: Bank Officials Not Entitled to Section 197 CrPC Protection Despite Public Servant Status || Kar HC Orders CBI Probe into 53-Acre Land Acquisition, Citing Alleged Monumental Fraud & Conspiracy || Supreme Court Grants Probation to Convicts; Rules Fine-Only Cases Also Eligible || SC Disposes Plea on Allied Health Course Moratorium After NCAHP Issues 2026–27 Guideline || Supreme Court Grants Promotion Relief to Employee Denied Relaxation, Calling it Discrimination || Patna HC: Tender Lapses if Not Extended on Time & Delay Cannot be Cured by Repeated Representations

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 :