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
shutvik [7]
2 years ago
11

there is a case thats not from your state but it is mandatory auhority in your state, how is this possible

Law
1 answer:
Kamila [148]2 years ago
3 0

Answer: the reason for that is becasue it may be on the borader line of the states where it had happen

You might be interested in
26. Confidentiality may be waived if the information (1 point)
Elis [28]

Answer:

Could change the jurors' final verdict

Explanation:

5 0
2 years ago
The statute of frauds requires certain types of contracts to be in writing. All of these contracts must be in writing except
mixer [17]

Answer and explanation:

The statute of frauds requires certain types of contracts to be in writing, but there exceptions. One of those would be the situation of working for an employer for the rest of your life.

This is an oral employement contract scenario and doesn't necessarily must be written in order for it to be enforceable. For this contract to be, in fact, enforceable, the promise should be crystal clear about the employer's right to extinguish.

6 0
3 years ago
if a local business owner has to be caught between the laws of the state and federal government, who should he listen too?
inysia [295]

Answer:

I would probably say state because the state holds the business license but I'm not 100% sure

6 0
3 years ago
Martina is arrested for a crime and refuses to take the witness stand at his or her trial.
Vlad1618 [11]

Answer:

In Griffin v. California, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination not only allows a criminal defendant to refuse to take the witness stand during his trial, but it also bars the prosecutor from urging the jury to interpret that silence as an indication that the defendant has something to hide. The Court reasons that the right against self-incrimination would be meaningless if a defendant’s exercise of the right could be used against him.

Hope this helps

6 0
3 years ago
Federal law prohibits the possession or
GrogVix [38]
I believe the answer is true. because 18+ you are not considered a child.
4 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • 1. Do you think solitary confinement is ethical? If not, explain what makes the practice unethical. If so, explain the circumsta
    13·1 answer
  • A server is caught serving alcohol to a group of friends who are all 19 years old. This is the server's
    9·1 answer
  • F points just answer this 12/56 888
    7·2 answers
  • Which two of the following most likely violate a right in the Bill of Rights?
    14·2 answers
  • Make a list of the top 10 powers that Congress has
    9·1 answer
  • What type of gov do these terms describe?
    9·1 answer
  • Which statement is FALSE about the process of foreclosure on a land contract?
    6·1 answer
  • A. what hazards might this motorcyclist encounter?
    11·1 answer
  • Foreign policy is?
    14·2 answers
  • While Clark Kent is on assignment, his boss at the newspaper enters his office and searches the desk, file cabinets, zippered br
    8·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!