In Palko v. Connecticut (1937), the Supreme Court had to decide whether "due process of law" means states must obey the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment
<u>Explanation:
</u>
The observation of the Supreme Court is that the convict cannot be punished two times for the same offense. It is simple and very clear that the convict cannot be punished under the fourth and fifth amendments for same offense.
In this particular case, the prosecution has charged Frank Palko for first-degree murder and the court has given a decree as life imprisonment. But the actual nature crime amounts to second-degree murder.
So, the state of Connecticut appealed against this judgment and it has been proved that offense made by Frank Palko amounts to second-degree murder and the death penalty is awarded to convict. The Supreme Court's main decision in Palko vs Connecticut was Palko was the victim of unconstitutional double jeopardy.
Answer:
The term is a minor offense or a felony
Explanation:
man that boy was naughty but i admit ive done damages myself but the total damages i caused were not to school property but to school bullies who had to go the hospital due to major wounds and concussions, that is why you dont challenge me when i have a batton, not to mention the health care bills were almost 500 thousand
Answer:
The major disadvantages of Executive Order is that is may sometimes conflict with State or Federal Laws, and their aren't a set of guidance for how far an Executive Order can go, which causes major conflict on the Local, State and Federal Level
Answer:
different types of development
Explanation:
