1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
NemiM [27]
2 years ago
8

The Supreme Court case of Escobedo v. Illinois (1963) involved what legal right?

Law
1 answer:
Neko [114]2 years ago
5 0

Answer:

Explanation:

Illinois (1963) involved what legal right?

the right to have a lawyer present during police interrogation

the right to remain silent while being arrested by police

the right to expunge criminal convictions from the record after winning an appeal

the right to investigate a crime for which the defendant has been accused

You might be interested in
When a product fails to perform as warranted, this is called a) contractual liability. O b) product malfunction. c) malicious ma
ozzi

I think it's d because an example of breach of warranty is: A salesman tells you that a washing machine makes no noise, but when you buy it, you find that it makes a lot of noise.

Hope this helps! Please give brainlist

3 0
3 years ago
The Bill of Rights consists of the first
Nikitich [7]

Answer:

10

Explanation:

no explanation needed

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which of the following is TRUE regarding the test drive portion of obtaining
Ira Lisetskai [31]
The answer is that they give you a vehicle but I don’t know because it can vary from state to state
8 0
2 years ago
2. What happened to savings in the United States? How did consumers contribute to this change?
Rina8888 [55]

Answer:

What happened to savings in the United States?

Explanation:

The saving rate went from 10% savings rate to a negative savings rate. Consumers did this by binged buying items. Consumers would buy so many things that that weren't necessary, consumers supersized everything they had, instead of saving.

4 0
3 years ago
Jack purchases a cola drink at a fast food chain, while drinking he determines the cola is a caustic drain cleaner. Jack may sue
Natali [406]

Answer:

breach of the implied of merchantability

Explanation:

Implied warrant of merchantability happens when an individual such as jack in this question, goes to buy a product that did not work as expected. In this case, Jack requested for a Cola drink which he bought and later realized it was caustic drain cleaner. The warranty guarantees that the cola drink gotten from the fast food chain must work according to why it was purchased and the sellers are not required to explain to jack that Cola drink is what he was going to get when buying the product from them because the law on its own, creates that warranty.

5 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Your country has just experienced a difficult Civil War in which many resources was were destroyed and many citizens in lost the
    11·2 answers
  • which supreme court procedure invovles justices discussing a case, debating it's key issues, and arriving at their own opinions
    8·1 answer
  • I WILL GIVE BRAINLIEST
    7·2 answers
  • Jay is fired from his job and sues his employer. Jay loses the trial, and he appeals. The reviewing court affirms the decision o
    6·1 answer
  • What is an example of how a crisis response team might help a community in crisis after a violent crime?
    10·2 answers
  • Why ethics is a crucial subject that needs to be taken into account?​
    15·1 answer
  • Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
    8·2 answers
  • I need help with this write about the 5 questions
    13·2 answers
  • What is considered a "strong" GDP growth percentage, year over year?<br> It is my unit test
    9·1 answer
  • By what year were there laws against abortion in practically every state in the u. S. ?.
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!