Answer:
This case involves a federal death sentence imposed on defendant-appellant Fields for conviction of a federal capital offense. Fields was sentenced to death largely on the basis of the opinion of a psychiatrist who stated that he could confidently predict Fields would be dangerous in the future. The psychiatrist testified that he did not know of any "standard psychiatric or medical procedures used in arriving at a determination or predicting future dangerousness" and that he was unaware of specific empirical data or studies. He issued his opinion without engaging in any testing or any other objective measures or use of an actuarial method. His basis for this opinion was discussions with the prosecutors and review of some records regarding the defendant. The defense attorney objected to the testimony as unreliable under the standards for expert testimony established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrill Dow Pharmaceutical (i.e., that proffered evidence must be grounded in scientific reasoning or methodology). The district court overruled the objections and allowed the expert testimony to go to the jury.
Explanation:
Tracy is in the hospital; someone told me (she) is quite ill.
C. A heavy rainstorm.
The text shows indication of a storm arriving. “Clouds arrived” are an indicator that clouds quickly appeared. “Lightning flashed” tells us these are storm clouds. It makes sense that next it would start raining, making the next event a heavy rainstorm.
Answer:
Having a good career that we like can help us maintain motivation.
Explanation:
If you don't have a career you like it can be difficult to want or desire working. For example, if you are an artistic person who loves music and painting, you would probably not want a job as a plumber, or electrician.
