Answer:
A Confession
Explanation:
In the case of Colorado v. Connelly (1986), Supreme Court Justice Wiliam Brennan considered A CONFESSION to be the strongest piece of evidence in a trial.
This is evident when he wrote in his dissent among other things that "Triers of fact accord confessions such heavyweight in their determination that the introduction of a confession makes the other aspects of a trial in court superfluous and the real trial, for all practical purposes, occurs when the confession is obtained."
A juvenile court could not hear a case involving a contract dispute because it lacks jurisdiction. subject matter
The juvenile court docket, additionally known as kid's court, special courtroom dealing with troubles of delinquent, not noted, or abused youngsters. The juvenile court fulfills the authorities's rolean as alternative determine, and, wherein no juvenile court exists, other courts should anticipate the characteristic.
The Juvenile Court no longer ponders a minimal age of criminality. Ten (10) is the minimum age for comfortable detention of a juvenile until it's far a capital offense. need to be at least 13 (thirteen) years of age so one can be declared as a JSO. The age of 18 triggers adult courtroom jurisdiction.2
Learn more about juvenile court here:-brainly.com/question/11399114
#SPJ4
Disclaimer: your question is incomplete, please see below for the complete question.
a. in personam
b. in rem
c. quasi in rem
d. subject matter
Answer:
Explanation:
Although it has been attempted to overturn the ruling in the Helling case, I would suppose that these attempts have been unsuccessful because the ruling was in favor of a higher standard of care than what was deemed appropriate by for the ophthalmologists. One might argue that the ruling has remained in place because holding the defendants liable was, in a way, a step towards checking the medical profession’s privilege to set it’s own standards. I feel as though legislature has probably not seen fit to reinforce it because the original ruling remains valid in that a doctor can follow all of the standards of care, and still be liable.
Answer:
They can be convicted
Explanation
I say this because if its weak evidence then its not gonna work BUT if its strong evidence that the judge would find helpful then that would work
