A federal statute designed to stop organized crime enumerated certain activities as crimes and provided that, in addition to cha
rging these activities as the crimes they constitute, the activities would also constitute the criminal act of intentional furtherance of the goals of organized crime. Among the enumerated activities was the interstate distribution of cocaine. The statute’s constitutionality has been upheld by the Supreme Court. The defendant was arrested by federal agents after having driven a truck containing cocaine from Florida to Illinois, where he delivered his illicit cargo as directed. At trial, the defendant is convicted of interstate distribution of cocaine in violation of federal law, and convicted of a violation of the federal statute above. How may the defendant be sentenced?
The meeting shown in the question above managed to violate two statutes, according to the statute developed to combat organized crime, in addition to violating the study that prohibits interstate drug transport. In that case, the convict must be tried for two infractions in different statutes and if convicted he must be convicted based on the guidelines of the two statutes.
Yes I agree that a lawyer should be provide for someone accused of committing a serious crime. I agree because they are being ACCUSED it doesn't mean that they have committed that crime that is why they need someone to fight for them.
Answer:According to Siegel (2006), there are four most common theories in attempting to explain victimization and its causes namely, the victim precipitation theory, the lifestyle theory, the deviant place theory and the routine activities theory.
