Answer:
Explanation:
Although it has been attempted to overturn the ruling in the Helling case, I would suppose that these attempts have been unsuccessful because the ruling was in favor of a higher standard of care than what was deemed appropriate by for the ophthalmologists. One might argue that the ruling has remained in place because holding the defendants liable was, in a way, a step towards checking the medical profession’s privilege to set it’s own standards. I feel as though legislature has probably not seen fit to reinforce it because the original ruling remains valid in that a doctor can follow all of the standards of care, and still be liable.
Answer:
is to hold brake because if the speed id fast you have to hold brake to stop it or to slow it.
Explanation:
Answer:
<em>An </em><em>amicus curiae brief</em><em> in support of a petitioner or appellant shall be filed within 30 days after the case is placed on the docket or a response is called for by the Court, whichever is later, and that time will not be extended.</em>
Answer:On January 12, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury requires that federal sentencing guidelines be advisory, rather than mandatory. 1 In doing so, the Court struck down a provision in law that made the federal sentencing guidelines mandatory 2 as well as a provision that permitted appellate review of departures from the guidelines. 3 In essence, the Court's ruling gives federal judges discretion in sentencing offenders by not requiring them to adhere to the guidelines; rather, the guidelines can be used by judges on an advisory basis. 4 As a result of the ruling, judges now have discretion in sentencing defendants unless the offense carries a mandatory sentence (as specified in law).
Explanation: :)
Answer:
it may prejudice the potential jurors against the defendant
