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
Licemer1 [7]
3 years ago
11

On a two-week vacation in a neighboring state,

Law
1 answer:
xz_007 [3.2K]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

no it can't be

Explanation:

because in your state they're illegal and by you trying to take them home from a state that they are legal in makes it illegal

You might be interested in
Which is the best definition of “supremacy”?
faust18 [17]
Believing that you are greater than another
6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
I do not like our mayor at all. I think he has made some very bad choices and is not managing our town very well. I’m going to p
GuDViN [60]

no

because thats bad lol

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The state of texas has placed caps on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice causes of action. This type of limitation on da
amid [387]

Answer:

The state of Texas has placed caps on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice causes of action. This type of limitation on damages is.. infliction of emotional distress. The members of the City High soccer team have been training with Hanson, a personal trainer who charges by the hour, for several years.

5 0
2 years ago
Federal district court judges hear A. mostly criminal cases, with an occasional civil case. B. criminal cases only. C. civil cas
Svetlanka [38]
The correct answer is A
8 0
2 years ago
How does the Fourth Amendment protect individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police? When are there exceptio
sammy [17]

INTERESTS PROTECTED

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures, but only those done by the government and deemed unreasonable under the law. To claim violation of Fourth Amendment as the basis for suppressing a relevant evidence, the court had long required that the claimant must prove that he himself was the victim of an invasion of privacy to have a valid standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has departed from such requirement, issue of exclusion is to be determined solely upon a resolution of the substantive question whether the claimant's Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, which in turn requires that the claimant demonstrates a justifiable expectation of privacy, which was arbitrarily violated by the government. In general, most warrantless searches of private premises are prohibited under the Fourth Amendment, unless specific exception applies. For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search. Exigent circumstances exist in situations where a situation where people are in imminent danger, where evidence faces imminent destruction, or prior to a suspect's imminent escape. On the other hand, warrantless search and seizure of properties are not illegal, if the objects being searched are in plain view. Further, warrantless seizure of abandoned property, or of properties on an open field do not violate Fourth Amendment, because it is considered that having expectation of privacy right to an abandoned property or to properties on an open field is not reasonable. However, in some states, there are some exception to this limitation, where some state authorities have granted protection to open fields. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but states cannot allow conducts that violate the Fourth Amendment. Where there was a violation of one’s fourth amendment rights by federal officials, A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages, resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. Under the Bivens action, the claimant needs to prove that there has been a constitutional violation of the fourth amendment rights by federal officials acting under the color of law. However, the protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

8 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • What is the difference between rights and virtues?|
    12·1 answer
  • What part of English government do you think
    13·1 answer
  • Tell of the Supreme Court's responsibility in interpreting the Constitution -- in other words, why does the U.S. Constitution pl
    14·1 answer
  • If a law enforcement officer stops a vehicle for a violation and finds a front seat passenger, 17 years of age or
    7·2 answers
  • Serial killer notes
    5·1 answer
  • Help ASAP law ty thankssss !!!
    7·1 answer
  • With a delayed reaction time, drivers need ...
    10·1 answer
  • Why do you think it took so long for women, African-Americans, and Native-Americans to be given the right to vote?
    13·1 answer
  • Xác định các bộ phận giả định, quy định, chế tài trong các điều luật sau:
    14·1 answer
  • Lanes of traffic on expressways flowing in different directions are divided by?
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!