Patna HC: Disciplinary Authority Cannot Impose Major and Minor Penalties in a Single Order || Calcutta HC: Landlord Decides His Residential Needs; Courts Cannot Set Living Standards in Eviction || Orissa HC: Second Marriage During Subsistence of First Remains Invalid Even After First Wife's Death || Karnataka HC: Appeals Against Acquittal in Bailable Offences Lie Only Before High Court || Supreme Court: Stamp Duty on an Agreement to Sell is Leviable Only if Possession is Transferred || SC: Motive Becomes Irrelevant When Direct Evidence Such as a Dying Declaration is Available || Supreme Court Issues Directions to CoC in Builder Insolvency Cases To Protect Homebuyers’ Interests || MP High Court: Women Retain Reservation Benefits After Marriage if Caste is Recognized in Both States || Allahabad HC: Police Must Prosecute Informants of False Firs, and IOs May Face Contempt if They Fail || MP HP: Over-Age Candidate Cannot Claim Age Relaxation Due to Delay in Earlier Recruitment

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 :