Telangana High Court: Barring People with over Two Children From Polls Violates No Fundamental Right || Del HC Clarifies That Breach of Promise to Marry is Not The Same as False Promise Amounting To Rape || Delhi High Court Rules Law Students Cannot be Barred From Exams For Not Meeting Minimum Attendance || Delhi HC: Only a Sessions Court, Not an Ilaqa Magistrate, Can Order Further Probe After Committal || Allahabad High Court: Protecting Homebuyers’ Interests is Paramount in Real Estate Insolvency || Allahabad HC: Police Can Freeze Accounts on Suspicion; Affected Party May Seek Magistrate’s Relief || NCLAT: Claimants Must Prove Asset Ownership; Liquidator Need Not Establish Title of Assets in Custody || NCLAT: Director’s Resignation Doesn’t Release Personal Guarantor from Continuing Guarantee Liability || NCLAT: Delay Condonable When Composite Appeal Filed in Time is Refiled after Registry’s Objection || Supreme Court: Upper Floors Can be Converted for Commercial Use Only after Paying Conversion Charges

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 :