Supreme Court: Courts Have Sometimes Failed Arbitration, With Interference Curing No Disease || Supreme Court: Co-Heir Cannot Sell Other Heirs' Shares as Karta After Intestate Succession || SC: Casual Labourers With Temporary Status are Eligible For Pension Even Without Regularisation || Supreme Court: High Courts Must Record the Nature of Crime and Allegations While Quashing FIRs || Delhi HC Rejected Pernod Ricard’s Plea Against Denial of Wholesale Liquor License over Excise Case || Gujarat HC: Lalita Kumari Ruling Does Not Permit Deceased’s Kin to Invoke Art 226 For FIR Failure || Ker HC: Denying Disability Pension to Army Personnel Based on Unreasoned Medical Opinion is Invalid || Kerala HC Directs Family Courts to Follow Calcutta HC Custody Guidelines Till State Rules Framed || Allahabad HC Allows LIC Employees to Be Engaged as Census Enumerators and Supervisors For Duties || Supreme Court Unveiled Victim Protection Plan For Trafficking Survivors and Urged Legal Reforms

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 :