Answer:
This statement is incorrect, since the theory has enormous relevance in law.
Explanation:
The law is basically a set of norms that regulates life in society, establishing guidelines for coexistence and rules of conduct that, if not complied with, have consequences that can range from simple fines to time in prison.
But unlike what the statement says, the law is composed of a theoretical component, which implies the sociological and cultural study of the law and the society to which it will apply, the consequences that it may have and its use in other societies. Without this study, the laws would be empty of content, since they would be simple rules without any basis and, therefore, very easy to be broken.
Answer:
True
Explanation:
This statement correctly identifies a characteristic of the <em>nolo contendere</em> plea. This is a legal term that expresses the desire to not contend. Therefore, this is also known as a plea of no contest. This is considered a plea in which the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge. This may lead to a determination of guilt, but it is inadmissible in later civil cases against the defendant based on the same conduct amounting to the criminal violation.
To find a lawyer for trial
Actually, a detective should be taking notes, while an officer should be finding the suspect. So the answer is- false.
Answer: C. The Supreme Court ruled that Dred Scott was not entitled to the rights of citizenship, which inflamed sectional tensions that eventually led to the outbreak of the Civil War.
Details:
Dred Scott was a slave who had been owned by a Missouri man named John Emerson. Emerson's service in the US military caused him to live for a time in Illinois (which was a free state) and Wisconsin (which was a free territory. Later, back in Missouri, after John Emerson died, Scott tried to purchase his freedom from Emerson's widow, who refused. With lawyers' help, he then filed suit to gain his freedom on the grounds that he had lived in a free state and free territory.
In Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), commonly referred to simply as "The Dred Scott case," the Supreme Court, by a 7 to 2 margin, issued its ruling that Scott was not entitled to his freedom just because he had lived at some times in free territory. The Court also ruled that African Americans were not and could never be citizens of the United States, and therefore did not have the legal standing to file such a lawsuit. The Court further stated that the Missouri Compromise of 1820 had been an overreach of federal government power -- that any states or territories were free to make their own decisions regarding slavery.
The Dred Scott decision was a controversial event which played into the tensions that by 1861 erupted into the Civil War in the United States.
Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/10791169#readmore
