SC: Section 22 of Hindu Succession Act Preference For Class-I Heirs Applies to Agricultural Land || Supreme Court: Refund Clause in Sale Agreement Does Not Extinguish Right to Specific Performance || SC Clarifies When a Probate Application Filed After a Testator's Death is Time-Barred || Madras HC: Coordinate Bench Cannot Reopen Issue Already Settled by Another Division Bench || Delhi HC Urges Law to Regulate Media, Notes Anyone with a Mobile Phone Can Claim to be a Journalist || CCI Rejects Allegations of Collusion Involving Reliance Jio and More Than 4,500 Entities || Allahabad HC: Working Mother with Child Custody Cannot Shift Entire Maintenance Liability to Father || Bombay HC: Possessory Suit U/S 6 of the SRA is Maintainable Despite a Licensor-Licensee Relationship || Del HC: Master's Candidates Without the Prescribed Bachelor's Degree are Ineligible as Govt Teacher || Cal HC: BSF Cannot Deny DIG Rank to an Officer Injured in 1995 Road Accident After Earlier Promotion

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 :