Analyzing the scenario, we see that the situation is repeated by the second. It may be that the first time, the woman did not know. But she had already been accused before, that is, that the second time, this was considered intentional and malicious conduct.
According to the penal code § 594, this act is considered vandalism, that is the defacing of another’s property with graffiti “or other inscribed material,” or damaging or destroying another’s property and this cant be done negligently, with the will to do the damage.
If she convicted of felony vandalism again, the maximum prison sentence is three years (after being convicted before) and fines can be up to $10,000. When the damage caused by the vandalism exceeds $10,000, the fines can be increased to $50,000. Then, comes the restitution (paying the owner property for the damage), and possibly community service.
?????????????????????????????
<u>Answer:</u>
The leaders of the peace party hoped that Stephen Austin would make the decision of acceding Texas with the United States after his return from Mexico.
<u>Explanation:
</u>
- The leaders of the peace the party had tried to persuade Stephen Austin, the empressario of Texas, to accede the territory of Texas with the United States for a long time.
- They wished that after Stephen Austin's return from Texas he makes an appeal to the residents of Texas telling them that they were now becoming a part of the United States.
Answer:
:)
Explanation:
I think that if reporters comment thing that are simply no true like
"oh Donald Trump should be inaugurated right now not Joe Biden"
Then there are going to be people who will agree with them with out fact checking anything. Then I think there would be people who would fact check everything to make sure they are correct (as they should). I think people (people who rely on facts) would look up on multiple sources to get to the bottom of things so they can call out people who are wrong.
<span>a fiscal crisis in urban areas</span>
