In Palko v. Connecticut (1937), the Supreme Court had to decide whether "due process of law" means states must obey the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment
<u>Explanation:
</u>
The observation of the Supreme Court is that the convict cannot be punished two times for the same offense. It is simple and very clear that the convict cannot be punished under the fourth and fifth amendments for same offense.
In this particular case, the prosecution has charged Frank Palko for first-degree murder and the court has given a decree as life imprisonment. But the actual nature crime amounts to second-degree murder.
So, the state of Connecticut appealed against this judgment and it has been proved that offense made by Frank Palko amounts to second-degree murder and the death penalty is awarded to convict. The Supreme Court's main decision in Palko vs Connecticut was Palko was the victim of unconstitutional double jeopardy.
Self protection, mental disorder
The person did this so they had to kill them
They were defending themselves
He gets to trade in his mother for a couple hours due to the corona virus
Answer:
At the age of 18 I guess coz that's basically the legal age, as far as I know
Answer:
local executive power
Explanation:
According to the given headline, "police arrest burglary suspect", the type of power being shown here is local executive power.
This type of power is power that is not given to the federal government but is divided between the state and local governments where they have the power and authority to arrest suspects.
