19. Which of the following evidence would always be admissible in-court?

Law

1 answer:

Drupady [299]2 years ago

7 0

Answer:

"Evidence that is formally presented before the trier of fact (i.e., the judge or jury) to consider in deciding the case. The trial court judge determines whether or not the evidence may be proffered. To be admissible in court, the evidence must be relevant (i.e., material and having probative value) and not outweighed by countervailing considerations (e.g., the evidence is unfairly prejudicial, confusing, a waste of time, privileged, or based on hearsay). Also termed competent evidence; proper evidence; legal evidence."

Explanation:

You might be interested in

A power of attorney should be used with great caution and only in exceptional circumstances because a. An attorney must be licen

zmey [24]

Generally, the power of attorney is expected to be used with great caution and only in exceptional circumstances because its grants extensive authority to an agent.

<h3>What is power of attorney?</h3>

This power is inferred in a a written document that confers express authority to agent and is usually notarized.

Hence, it is expected to be used with great caution and only in exceptional circumstances because its grants extensive authority to an agent.

Therefore, the Option B is correct.

Read more about power of attorney

<em>brainly.com/question/20397360</em>

8 0

1 year ago

2. How is it possible for citizens from two different countries to see the same thing and interpret it

andrew11 [14]

Previous experiences and culture are two factors that effect how an individual interprets something.

3 0