I believe if the are underange he may be forced unless certain situations things like joint custody might come into play. joint physical custody is where a court orders a child to spend a substantial amount of time with both parents during the course of the year. Second, joint legal custody is where, although one parent may have full physical custody, both parents must agree on any decisions that impact the child, such as their education, medical care and spiritual matters. Lastly, both joint physical and legal custody is a combination of the first two. IT IS ULTIMATELY up to the court to decide whether any type of joint custody is in the best interests of a child. If not, the parent with primary custodial rights over a child will get to decide what kind of visitation for the other parent is fair and reasonable. In many situations, this works out well for both parents and they can often come to an amicable arrangement regarding visitation hours and days.
Forensic scientists can use DNA profiles to identify criminals or determine parentage. Some potential challenges may be using wrong methods, the role of human error in interpreting the results.
Considering the available options, the choice that is considered as an innovative criminal defense strategy is "<u>battered women's syndrome."</u>
<h3>What is battered women's syndrome?</h3>
Battered women's syndrome is a medical and psychological term that is used to describe the severe mental health ailment resulting from serious domestic abuse.
Given the legal situation, battered women's syndrome is not a typical condition that is common but has been innovated by some defenders to justify their offense so they can get discharged and acquitted.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that the correct answer is <u>Battered women's syndrome.</u>
Learn more about the criminal defense strategy here: brainly.com/question/11342133
Answer:
it would be segregation and free speech
Explanation:
Answer:
A term used to describe the situation in which a public official or fiduciary who, contrary to the obligation and absolute duty to act for the benefit of the public or a designated individual, exploits the relationship for personal benefit, typically pecuniary.
In certain relationships, individuals or the general public place their trust and confidence in someone to act in their best interests. When an individual has the responsibility to represent another person—whether as administrator, attorney, executor, government official, or trustee—a clash between professional obligations and personal interests arises if the individual tries to perform that duty while at the same time trying to achieve personal gain. The appearance of a conflict of interest is present if there is a potential for the personal interests of an individual to clash with fiduciary duties, such as when a client has his or her attorney commence an action against a company in which the attorney is the majority stockholder.
Incompatibility of professional duties and personal interests has led Congress and many state legislatures to enact statutes defining conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest and specifying the sanctions for violations. A member of a profession who has been involved in a conflict of interest might be subject to disciplinary proceedings before the body that granted permission to practice that profession.
