In <em>Mapp v. Ohio</em>, the Supreme Court ruled <u>B. If the police</u> violate the law to obtain evidence, they cannot use that evidence against an accused person in court.
<h3>What was the place of evidence in the case of Mapp v. Ohio?</h3>
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the state in a 5-3 vote, favoring Mapp, from whom evidence was obtained without due process.
The implication is that evidence seized unlawfully from a suspect or an accused, without a search warrant, could not be used in criminal prosecutions in state courts.
Thus, in <em>Mapp v. Ohio</em>, the Supreme Court ruled <u>B. If the police</u> violate the law to obtain evidence, they cannot use that evidence against an accused person in court.
Learn more about the importance of evidence in criminal prosecutions at brainly.com/question/7802791
#SPJ1
Napoleon supported many principles of enlightenment such as sovereignty, trial by jury, equality before the law, a citizen army, freedom of religion, abolition of feudal privileges, and freedom of the press.
Answer:
Banks stopped loaning money, Too many people were buying credit
Explanation:
The statement about business regulations that is accurate is that all businesses are subject to local state and federal regulations. The correct option among all the options that are given in the question is the last option or option "d". breaking any one regulation can be punishable offence and it can lead to stern actions against the business group.
