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
ExtremeBDS [4]
3 years ago
11

Question 4

Law
2 answers:
cricket20 [7]3 years ago
5 0
The officer may not go into your pockets even in a justified stop and frisk unless he has probable cause to believe that you have a weapon or contraband hidden away. An officer may only conduct the frisking portion of a stop and frisk if they reasonably suspect that the person they stopped is carrying a dangerous weapon.
irina1246 [14]3 years ago
3 0

Answer:

its false

Explanation:

it is false not if you just want you have no right to search without notice unless it is really necessary

pleass mark me as brainliest only 1

You might be interested in
Value of woman to man​
Tanzania [10]

Answer:

alot

Explanation:

7 0
2 years ago
Alcohol is the number one killer on the roadways?<br> Select one:<br> True<br> False
Mekhanik [1.2K]

Answer:

The statement is true :)

3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Which statement is the best argument against social darwinism
qwelly [4]
D. Is the correct answer hope that helped
5 0
4 years ago
because the framers of the united states constitution (written in 1787) believed that protecting property rights relating to inv
ser-zykov [4K]

Because the framers of the United States Constitution (written in 1787) believed that protecting property rights relating to inventions would encourage the new nation’s economic growth, they gave Congress—the national legislature—a constitutional mandate to grant patents for inventions. The resulting patent system has served as a model for those in other nations. Recently, however, scholars have questioned whether the American system helped achieve the framers’ goals. These scholars have contended that from 1794 to roughly 1830, American inventors were unable to enforce property rights because judges were “anticipate” and routinely invalidated patents for arbitrary reasons. This argument is based partly on examination of court decisions in cases where patent holders (“patentees”) brought suit alleging infringement of their patent rights. In the 1820s, for instance, 75 percent of verdicts were decided against the patentee. The proportion of verdicts for the patentee began to increase in the 1830s, suggesting to these scholars that judicial attitudes toward patent rights began shifting then.

To learn more about protecting property rights visit here ; brainly.com/question/28388414?referrer=searchResults

#SPJ4

4 0
1 year ago
What weather factor is consistently connected to crime in studies
soldier1979 [14.2K]

Answer:

I think It's temperature

Explanation:

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Your company is planning to market a new reading lamp and has segmented the market into three groups: avid readers, regular read
    10·1 answer
  • What was the name of the judge in a Civil Action?
    10·2 answers
  • What stage of rigor mortis shows the body fully rigid?
    9·1 answer
  • Need help on This DMV question number 29
    10·1 answer
  • Which service handled by local government is an example of the concept of service-by-size?
    7·2 answers
  • How might a person trained to be a prosecutor become an Assistant US Attorney (AUSA)?
    15·2 answers
  • Do you think it is fair for law enforcement officers to be able to stop and frisk citizens? Why or why not?
    8·2 answers
  • The prt of the business cycle in which the economy starts to slow down is called
    13·1 answer
  • At a minimum how many days per year must workers perform class i class ii
    15·1 answer
  • Which two reasons describe how the United States has become involved in military conflicts?
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!