CCI Dismisses Complaint Against Rapido over Use of Private Vehicles in Bike Taxi Service || Allahabad HC: State Must Protect Individuals Threatened for Conducting Prayers in Private Spaces || Madras HC: Habeas Corpus Petition Cannot Be Used if Wife Voluntarily Elopes with Another Man || Calcutta High Court: Post-VRS Service Benefits Cannot be Denied; Ex-Employees Entitled to Arrears || SC: SAIL Can Withhold Gratuity to Adjust Penal Rent if Ex-Employees Illegally Retain Quarters || Supreme Court: Appellate Courts Should Not Easily Alter MACT Compensation Awards || Supreme Court: Quashing FIR in Forgery Case Unjustified While Handwriting Expert’s Report Pending || Raj HC: Convicted Minor Gang Rapist Not Fully Barred From Open-Air Camps; Rules Allow Exceptions || Calcutta High Court: Serving a Show-Cause Notice Via Email is Valid under PMLA Regulations || Del HC: Candidate’s Independent Medical Opinions Don’t Justify Fresh Medical Exam in SSC 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 :