1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Verdich [7]
3 years ago
13

Based on a tip from a reliable informant that an attorney was illegally selling automatic weapons and ammunition from his storef

ront office, the police obtained a warrant to search for weapons at the office. When they arrived at the building, they saw a client exiting the attorney's office and placing what appeared to be a weapon inside his jacket. The police stopped the client on the street and an officer patted down his outer clothing. The officer felt no weapon but did feel a bag with several small tube-shaped objects in it. She immediately placed the client under arrest. The contents of the bag were later determined to be marijuana cigarettes. Prior to trial on the narcotics charge, the client sought to suppress introduction of the marijuana as evidence. The arresting officer testified at the suppression hearing that, based on her long experience as a narcotics officer, she concluded immediately that the bag contained marijuana cigarettes when she first touched it. If the officer's testimony is believed, how should the court rule on the motion to suppress the marijuana evidence
Law
1 answer:
xxTIMURxx [149]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

Suppression of important evidence, extra punishment.

Explanation:

I am no law student, but by what I read here, the drugs are an important evidence to the case, and cannot be suppressed to the court. Plus, by what I heard, if an officer gets a warrant for an illegal weapon trade and find illegal drugs (narcotics charge) with a dealer/client, there can still be a charge, but not for illegal weaponry, but for illegal drugs.

You might be interested in
4. Investigate any one court case from the "Court Cases to Know" assignment.
xz_007 [3.2K]

Answer:

Before any  cases get to supreme court it has to be a federal matter or issue of interpretation of the constitution or issue of controversy between 2 states

The cases has to come from the state supreme to Federal court of Appeal  to Supreme court

Explanation:

7 0
3 years ago
a man is accused of holding up a liquor store and stealing hundreds of dollars from the cash register. where is this case heard
Pepsi [2]

The will be first heard at a trial court.

The trial courts of a U.S. federal judiciary are the district courts. Every federal judicial district, each of which covers one U.S. state or, in certain cases, a portion of a state, has one district court. There is minimum one courthouse for every district court, but many districts have much more than one. Decisions of district courts may be appealed to a U.S. court of appeals again for relevant circuit.

District courts have jurisdiction over both civil and criminal issues and thus are court of law, justice, and admiralty. Federal district courts, in contrast to American state courts, have a narrower scope of jurisdiction and are only able to hear cases involving conflicts between citizens of different states, issues of federal law, and federal offences.

To know more about federal judiciary:

brainly.com/question/18868646

#SPJ4

8 0
1 year ago
What is one thing the Federal Government system can do to ease Mass Incarceration?
Trava [24]

Answer:

*Eliminate prison for lower-level crimes

Explanation: Prison is often the default criminal justice sanction when someone breaks the law. It shouldn’t be that way. For those who commit a lower-level crime like drug possession, petty theft, or selling marijuana, prison is not just unfair, it is also a bad sanction for society at large.Prison costs $31,000 a year per prisoner, and often does little to prevent re-offense for these crimes. Probation, treatment, or community service are all more appropriate for many lower-level crimes, not to mention much cheaper (probation is 10 times less expensive). State legislatures and Congress should change sentencing laws to make alternatives to prison the default penalty for certain lower-level crimes, like drug possession and petty theft.

*Reduce sentence minimums and maximums currently on the books

Explanation: If someone commits a serious crime, like robbery, they should be punished. But there’s little evidence that staying in prison for such long periods of time, such as the 20 or 30-year sentences imposed, will rehabilitate prisoners. In fact, research indicates that longer stays in prison do not lead to lower recidivism. Sometimes, longer stays can even increase recidivism. With prison stays growing longer each year, lawmakers should consider reducing the time many inmates spend behind bars when it’s not necessary. State and federal legislatures should reduce the minimum and maximum sentencing guidelines, and make them more proportional to the crimes committed. We suggest in the report that legislators consider a 25 percent cut as a starting point for the six major crimes (aggravated assault, drug trafficking, murder, non-violent weapons offenses, robbery and serious burglary) that make up the bulk of the nation’s current prison population. This will make our system smarter while still protecting public safety.

*Prosecutors should seek lower penalties when appropriate

Explanation: Prosecutors should use their discretion to implement the recommendations in our report. Their sentencing recommendations should not simply aim to put defendants behind bars for the longest time possible. The best way to keep us all safe is for prosecutors to seek the most proportional punishment – one that fits the crime — not simply the harshest one.

*Eliminate “Three Strikes Laws” and “Truth in Sentencing”

Explanation: Both policies take away the ability of judges to properly asses the appropriate sentence for defendants in the criminal justice system. We should trust our judges to make these decisions instead of forcing an inappropriate sentence with set-in-stone rules.

*Reinvest savings into crime prevention polices

Explanation: The recommendations in the recent Brennan Center report would save almost $20 billion dollars a year. We should reinvest those savings into police, schools, and reentry programs, which will help improve public safety even more. $20 billion could cover 270,000 police officers, 327,000 teachers, or 360,000 probation officers. Most experts agree that these investments better prevent crime than prison.

^^ here are a few :)

3 0
3 years ago
rue or False: If you are under the age of 18, your license can be suspended for six months to one year for the first offense.
vesna_86 [32]

Answer:

True

Explanation:

as you go on 1st offence 2nd offence 3rd offence and so forth it gets worse depending on how bad your first offence will be 6 months to a year

7 0
2 years ago
Does texas bill allows for death penalty for women who get abortions?
Maksim231197 [3]
No sir or ma’am sorry to tell you
4 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • I need to match the birthdays,last name,and weight to each baby. I have answers down but have no clue if they are correct, someo
    8·1 answer
  • Someone please help!
    11·1 answer
  • Instead of directly addressing the problem, an abuser will medicate it away by indirectly denying its impact for a short while.
    13·1 answer
  • How to you think race is or is not related to the police use of force? What do you base your opinion upon?
    14·1 answer
  • When may you drive in the left lane of a road with two lanes? With four lanes?
    15·1 answer
  • John Wayne Gacy was a serial killer who would kill his victims and then hid them under his house. Which test would they use to p
    11·1 answer
  • Ayudenme por fis
    15·1 answer
  • 1. Many of the costs of roadway crashes are paid by those not directly involved - primarily through insurance premiums, taxes an
    8·1 answer
  • Ideas, beliefs, or attitudes about what is important are _________.
    5·1 answer
  • Which of the following country is follow presidential dimocracy system a) france b) Senegal c) USA​
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!