Article III of the Constitution establishes the judicial branch of Government with the creation of the Supreme Court. Section 1 of Article III begins: The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
Answer:
I believe through reading these questions that the best answer would be D.
Explanation:
I believe that D is the answer since Hank is a computer forensics specialist that his first task would be to analyze any physical or digital computer components that could be involved in that crime scene.
Supporters of the new Constitution, known as the Federalists, included such prominent figures as George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and James Madison. Their chief concern was strengthening the national government in order to promote unity and stability.
Answer: The answer is explained below
Explanation:
A layoff is a termination of an employment at the employer's will. A layoff may be either temporary or permanent and can occur for reasons such as new technology, downsizing, or changes in market conditions. In this case with regards to the question, Amina told Bryan that his service is no longer needed due to an economic circumstances. While accepting and signing a job offer, there are legal agreement which has to be made.
Here,an anticipatory breach occurs when Amina states, in advance of the due date that Bryan was meant to start the job that she intends not fulfilling the agreement of having him as a delivery man.
In this situation, Bryan can't sue Amina because it wasn't her fault that an economic situation arises. If he had left a previous job to take Amina's offer, that could have been a different case.
According to the labour welfare law, in case any employer rejects the job offer the individual can raise a concern against him. An economic conditions can come up anytime so Bryan shouldn't sue Amina.
Answer:
You are the trial judge at the sentencing hearing. If you wish, you can rely on the suppressed confession for a sentence enhancement, in effect imposing the same sentence Bertha would have received for second-degree murder. Should you do so? Why or why not?
b. If you were on the appellate court reviewing Bertha’s sentence imposed as described in (a), would you rule that this sentence is fair?
