Answer:
Skumo Rakno Sping Skido Skido Skido Skido Pow
![[tex]\purple{\rule{45pt}{7pt}}\red{\rule{45pt}{999999pt}}[tex]](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%5Btex%5D%5Cpurple%7B%5Crule%7B45pt%7D%7B7pt%7D%7D%5Cred%7B%5Crule%7B45pt%7D%7B999999pt%7D%7D%5Btex%5D)
Answer:
No, as hearsay not within any exception.
Explanation:
(B) The sketch is inadmissible on hearsay grounds. Under Rule 801 of the Federal Rules, prior identification can be admissible, and the sketch could be deemed a prior identification. However, to be admissible, the witness must be there to testify at trial and be subject to cross-examination. The witness in this case is unavailable; hence, this exception does not apply. (D) is therefore incorrect. (A) applies to documentary evidence and has no relevance to this question. (C) is likewise not applicable, because this exception applies only to information within the personal knowledge of the public employee. In this case, the public employee gained the knowledge from the hearsay statements of an absent witness.
Answer:
The federal government's argument must prevail.
Explanation:
The medical marijuana of Angel Raich and Diane Monson really affects the interstate marijuana market and interferes with government control of that product. In this case, the federal government has the authority to regulate and prohibit the consumption and sale of this product. In this case, the action of justice in destroying the factories of Angel and Diane was correct, and it is not up to them to open a case in their defenses.
Answer:
Explanation:
Illinois (1963) involved what legal right?
the right to have a lawyer present during police interrogation
the right to remain silent while being arrested by police
the right to expunge criminal convictions from the record after winning an appeal
the right to investigate a crime for which the defendant has been accused
