Madhya Pradesh High Court: Victims Must be Given a Hearing Even Before Closure Report Rejection || Delhi HC: Payment of ‘Pagri’ Does Not Render Tenancy Non-Terminable, Allowing Eviction || Ker HC Examined Whether Electro-Homeopathy Can be Practised Without Registration under Medical Laws || Delhi HC: Better Possessory Title Holder Can Recover Property From Occupant Without Superior Right || Bombay High Court: Compensatory Afforestation Must Be in Same or Nearby Locality For Residents || Bombay High Court Protects ‘MEFTAL-SPAS’, Restrains Use of Similar Drug Brand || 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

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 :