I think it begins with the prosecutor...sorry if I’m wrong...:(
Answer: A homocide.
Explanation: Mainly for the reason of a suspect not caring about the life of another human being. If it was taken to court, it would be garnered prison time, lifetime if the lawyer isn’t very good.
Answer:
Hsu was indicted for violating the Economic Espio- nage Act by conspiring to steal corporate trade secrets for an anti-cancer drug. The defense requested a copy of the trade secret documents. The government contended that the defense did not need access to the documents except under supervision of the judge. The defense maintained a right of full access to the documents so the defense of impossibil- ity could be established, meaning Hsu could not steal trade secrets that did not exist. District court agreed with the defense; government appealed. Must the defendant be allowed full access to trade secrets that are a key part of a case? [U.S. v. Hsu, 155 F. 3d 189, 3rd Cir. (1998)]
Explanation:
Answer:
Fifth
Explanation:
That's called double jeopardy, which is explained in the 5th amendment.
Answer:
declared that separate educational facilities were unlawful
Explanation:
The Brown v. Board of Education was established in 1954 and created an opposition to the Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896 who affirmed the legality of racial segregation in public places such as buses, schools, squares, hospitals and other places. This opposition was established because at the end of the Brown v. The Board of Education, the Supreme Court ruled that educational institutions that established systems of racial segregation would be acting illegally and that from that moment on they should promote full equal education to all students, regardless of their colors or races.
