Answer:
The exclusionary rule prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of the United States Constitution. The decision in Mapp v. Ohio established that the exclusionary rule applies to evidence gained from an unreasonable search or seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment. The decision in Miranda v. Arizona established that the exclusionary rule applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and to evidence gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. However, the rule does not apply in civil cases, including deportation hearings. See INS v. Lopez-Mendoza.
I think the answer would be E none of the above because all of them are types of dangers law enforcement may have to encounter
Answer:
initial appearance
Explanation:
In the United States, the states that do not utilize preliminary hearings schedule an arraignment date at the initial appearance.
brainliest? :)
1) a situation in which human wants are greater than the capacity of available resources to provide for those wants
2)a situation in which a resource has more than one valuable use
