Marijuana seized from the farmer's home should not be suppressed because the warrant would be declared invalid by the court.
There is insufficient information to support the creditability and personal knowledge of the information.
What is warrant?
A warrant is a writ issued by a judge that authorizes law enforcement personnel to take certain actions, such as making an arrest, searching a location, or seizing property.
Hence marijuana should not seized from the farmer's house as explained that there is insffucient information
Learn more "warrant" here
brainly.com/question/21575414
#SPJ1
Biopsychosocial.
The term biopsychosocial refers to the various circles of influence on the individual ranging from close friends and family to the institutions and policies of a country or the world as a whole.
Social scientists use the term Biopsychosocial to refer to the interaction in which biological, psychological, and sociocultural factors play a role in the development of an individual's symptoms.
In the biological tradition, psychological disorders are attributed to biological causes. In the psychological tradition, disorders are attributed to faulty psychological development, and to social context.
Learn more about Biopsychosocial at
brainly.com/question/4157133
#SPJ4
Answer:
voting, volunteering, participating in group activities, and community gardening. Some are individual activities that benefit society (e.g., voting) or group activities that benefit either the group members (e.g., recreational soccer teams) or society (e.g., volunteer organizations
Appeals are decided by panels of three judges. The court of appeals does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses; rather the judges make their decision based on the written record of the case in the trial court, the briefs submitted by the parties, and possibly oral argument.
Answer:
C. State constitutions guaranteed individual liberties.
Explanation:
The 1787 ratification of the Constitution of the United States was one of the major issues of discord between the supporters and opposers of the process. They are known as the Federalists and anti-Federalists.
The main argument of the Anti-federalists was that the federal government will have a massive hold over the people and restrict or minimize individual freedom. They believed that this new Constitution will lead to tyranny and reduce the powers of the state. To them, they wanted the division of power between the national and state governments, for a strong national government will only give more power to the President and individual state powers will lead to oppression. So, their argument was for a state government that will guarantee and allow individual liberties.
Thus, the correct answer is option C.
