The sentence that uses correct subject-verb agreement is:
C. The kindergarteners in that classroom are not going outside because of the rain.
<h3>What is a correct subject-verb agreement?</h3>
A correct subject-verb agreement is one where there is a logical flow between the plural or singular subject and the action words that are used to describe them. In the sentence above, we can see that the subject is in its plural form, "the kindergarteners."
This is closely matched by the plural verb, "are." If a singular subject was used in this sentence, then, it will be also right to insert a singular verb in the sentence. Thus, the option is right because it has a correct subject-verb agreement.
Learn more about the subject-verb agreement here:
brainly.com/question/26178998
#SPJ1
Answer:
They like to speak with you and they value your freindship.
Explanation:
For a mock trial, some students will transform the cafeteria into a space with a classical style, inspired by the Supreme Court building
The answer is A
<em>Hope it helps..</em>
Panem is where she lives, it used to be america
Stevenson requests a direct appeal of Walter’s conviction. In his written brief, he notes several flaws in Walter’s case, including faulty witness testimonies, State misconduct, racial bias in jury selection, and an unnecessary judge override of the jury’s life sentence. At the appeals court in Montgomery, Stevenson appears before Chief Judge John Patterson, the KKK-backed former Alabama governor notorious for resisting de-segregation and refusing to allow law enforcement to protect the Freedom Riders from violent mobs. At the end of Stevenson’s oral argument, Judge Patterson responds by asking Stevenson where he is from. Stevenson, caught off guard, responds that he “lives in Montgomery.” Stevenson regrets dissuading Walter’s family from requesting time off to travel to Montgomery, now wondering if their supportive presence would have helped distinguish Walter’s case. The State’s lawyer defends Walter’s conviction as “routine” and his sentence as “appropriately imposed.” Judge Patterson denies the appeal.
Stevenson encourages Walter to remain hopeful because they have new evidence and several remaining options, including a reconsideration of the direct appeal decision. Stevenson recently hired Michael O’Connor, a son of Irish immigrants and recovered heroin addict originally from a rough neighborhood. Though Michael regards his history of addiction with regret, Stevenson sees his background as an asset to their work. Stevenson and his colleagues have discovered records showing that county officials paid Bill Hooks and “somehow” had his city criminal charges dropped, which is information that the State should legally have disclosed pre-trial. They also found flyers advertising the fish fry held at Walter’s house, which confirmed it was held the day of the murder. They contacted Walter’s mechanic, who discredited Bill Hook’s testimony by confirming that the mechanic modified Walter’s truck six months after Ronda’s murder. Finally, a clerk at the store where Myers was asked to identify Walter confirms that Myers had to ask which black man was Walter.
Stevenson’s determination to pursue all available recourses for Walter demonstrates his perseverance and commitment to this case. Stevenson’s positive reaction to Michael’s story of addiction serves to reinforce the book’s emphasis on the importance of redemption. By framing Michael’s past mistakes as assets, Stevenson implies that he values having staff members who can identify with the population they serve. Michael’s past allows him to see clients as more fully human, and enables clients to trust Michael more easily. Stevenson implies that county officials conducted illegal activity, which they intentionally hid. Further, he implies that the corruption included collaboration with city, everything.”
