I believe the answer is Amendment 1, which is in regards to Religion and Expression . Her right to “freedom of speech” is being violated .
Answer:
On June 12, 1994, Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman, were found dead at Brown's home. Prosecutors argued that Simpson killed his ex-wife and her lover out of jealousy. Prosecutors began by reporting Nicole Brown Simpson's call to the emergency center from 1989. In it, Nicole Brown said she was afraid Simpson would harm her. Prosecutors also came up with Simpson's DNA material and shoe prints from him, found at the scene of the crime. Dozens of experts stated that Simpson must have been at the scene of the crime. There was a lot of circumstantial scientific evidence.
Simpson hired a team of expensive attorneys led by Robert Shapiro and later Johnnie Cochran. Cochran was nationally known as a lawyer for (mainly black) celebrities and specialized in cases involving discrimination or police brutality. From the outset, the defense was based on the charge of racism. The lawyers claimed that Simpson had been a victim of police fraud by depositing evidence against Simpson at the crime scene. The leader of the investigation into the double murder (Mark Fuhrman) was called a racist by the defense, and the lawyers found footage in which Fuhrman had used the N word.
While prosecutors believed they had a solid case and expected a conviction, polls showed that a majority of black residents of the United States believed that Simpson had been a victim of police fraud. Most white residents of the United States were convinced of Simpson's guilt. As the jury's verdict drew closer, racial tension rose, and some politicians feared a repeat of the Los Angeles race riots a few years earlier. On October 3, 1995 Simpson was acquitted of murder by the jury.
The open field doctrine states that officers are allowed to search and take evidence on private property outside of the immediate vicinity of a dwelling without obtaining a warrant.
- A "warrantless search of the area outside a property owner's curtilage" does not violate the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, according to the open-fields doctrine (also known as the open-field doctrine or open-fields rule) in American criminal procedural law.
- Explains that as long as objects are immediately recognizable as being subject to seizure and are within the sight of an officer who is legally present in the location from where the view is made, they may be properly confiscated without a warrant (illegal).
To know more about doctrine, kindly click on the link below :
brainly.com/question/11271619?referrer=searchResults
#SPJ4
Answer:
TRUE
Explanation:
As far as I know, the Supreme Court is the court of last resort. There is nowhere else to go to question its actions. The Supreme Court itself held that it “is a court of last resort, and must so remain if it is to satisfactorily perform the functions assigned to it by fundamental Charter and immemorial tradition.
