Answer:
As used in these standards, “prosecutor” means any attorney, regardless of agency, title, or full or part-time assignment, who acts as an attorney to investigate or prosecute criminal cases or who provides legal advice regarding a criminal matter to government lawyers, agents, or offices participating in the investigation or prosecution of criminal cases. These Standards are intended to apply in any context in which a lawyer would reasonably understand that a criminal prosecution could result.
These Standards are intended to provide guidance for the professional conduct and performance of prosecutors. They are written and intended to be entirely consistent with the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, and are not intended to modify a prosecutor's obligations under applicable rules, statutes, or the constitution. They are aspirational or describe “best practices,” and are not intended to serve as the basis for the imposition of professional discipline, to create substantive or procedural rights for accused or convicted persons, to create a standard of care for civil liability, or to serve as a predicate for a motion to suppress evidence or dismiss a charge. For purposes of consistency, these Standards sometimes include language taken from the Model Rules of Professional Conduct; but the Standards often address conduct or provide details beyond that governed by the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. No inconsistency is ever intended; and in any case a lawyer should always read and comply with the rules of professional conduct and other authorities that are binding in the specific jurisdiction or matter, including choice of law principles that may regulate the lawyer’s ethical conduct.
Because the Standards for Criminal Justice are aspirational, the words “should” or “should not” are used in these Standards, rather than mandatory phrases such as “shall” or “shall not,” to describe the conduct of lawyers that is expected or recommended under these Standards. The Standards are not intended to suggest any lesser standard of conduct than may be required by applicable mandatory rules, statutes, or other binding authorities.
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/criminal_justice/standards/ProsecutionFunctionFourthEdition/ for more info
Explanation:
Answer:
No
Explanation:
Because the Housing Authority tacked an eviction notice on Lindsey’s door. That means she has to receive it. If they send it through the mail, it'll make sense that she hasn't received the letter because it could be lost in the other mail, but the Housing Authority put it on the door which means she did see it, but she just ignored it. She knows that she was supposed to come to court on time and on the correct date. It's like if she's turning in homework late in #oogle Classroom while ignoring the due date and time. To be honest, I think that maybe the Housing Authority should of give her at least two or three warnings, but Lindsey did actually see the letter.
Brainlist pls!
Depends on the situation does the women has a history of being aggressive
Answer:
c.
Explanation:
If for example in a neighborhood , people have different rules as to what goes on their rented private lands and while the neighbor with blue house allows bugs as a cruelty free zoning opportunity ,the neighbor with the red house made it well known that any bugs that are on his land can be hurt and killed with any process as long as it doesn't affect his property.The bugs where killed but as the blue neighbor disagrees they go to the townspeople to settle if those bug should have been transported to the blue house.In this case the case should be given to the closest authority which is the police. please correct this story to explain the situation at hand.
