Which of the following amendments would protect you in the scenario found in the following question?

It would be inappropriate to refer to "criminal law," as if it were a singular entity. Why is this? Discuss all that "criminal l

Soloha48 [4]

Answer:

In simple words, Crime legislation is an offence-related area of law. It forbids behaviour that is viewed as dangerous, hazardous and sometimes jeopardising the land, health , safety and spiritual well-being of others, including one's own self.

Criminal law differs significantly by territory and varies from common law, within which there is more focus on resolving disputes and market financing than on retribution or reintegration.

Criminal process is a formalised legal action that verifies the conduct of a felony and requires the perpetrator to be convicted or rehabilitated.

4 0

3 years ago

Think of something that you believe is critical for every person to have in their life. This could be education, work, food, or

Marrrta [24]

As a member of LGBTQ+, I am constantly fighting this *cracks knuckles* here we go, bigots >:3

~

As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, it is my job and duty to say that we endure too much. Some of us have never come out in fear of rejection. Some of us have been murdered or r*aped due to us revealing our true identities. Many people have the support of parents, family, and friends. And just as many,<em> possibly even more</em>, do not. Some people may not go out with their partners in fear of being assaulted, slurred at, or having a Bible thrown at them. This is is not, never was, and never will be a choice. So just <em>why?</em> Why hate on those like you? Why hate on those who have quotidian lives just like you; people who have families just like you, people who need to shower, and eat and drink just like you?

If you believe in basic human rights, in people not being attacked by acquaintances, join me and many others in the fight for LGBTQ+ rights.

~

sorry if it's too short; I spent <em>a lot</em> of time on this. just pls give credit UwU and may I have Brainliest? thank you :)

5 0

3 years ago

What was one major weakness of the Articles of Confederation?

zloy xaker [14]

Answer:

D. It did not give the Confederation Congress a way to raise money

by collecting taxes.

Explanation:

They made it too difficult for the government to raise money through taxes and duties. Congress had not have the power to tax. The national Congress was denied the power to tax, so it could not pay for the army and navy needed to defend the nation.

4 0

3 years ago

Jesse james, a 20-year old, was arrested for killing a police officer. As a newly elected prosecutor, you are responsible for pr

Nana76 [90]

It is important to note that various states use various metrics. In general, states adhere to some form of the federal procedural norms. States do have the freedom to take risks in the sake of justice.

<h3>What are federal procedural norms?</h3>

Civil process in United States district courts is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The Rules Enabling Act requires the United States Supreme Court to promulgate the FRCP, after which the United States Congress has seven months to veto the rules or they become part of the FRCP.

<h3>Further overview on the above legal situation is as follows:</h3>

At the first stage of the "trial," the defendant must submit a plea. This is frequently followed by a first appearance or preliminary hearing, which may involve a plea if evidence is discovered.

If there are compelling reasons to proceed, a grand jury will be formed to conduct more investigations.

A grand jury must provide evidence that justifies a capital murder trial. The district attorney's office has the same authority. The defendant is then asked if he understands the charge at a pre-trial arraignment.

A plea can also be entered here at times. If the evidence merits it, a formal writ will be sent to the court, signaling the start of a trial.

Following that, pre-trial hearings are held, and witnesses may be questioned. If the defendant claims to have an alibi, he must normally produce documentation. He must describe in full where and when he was when he was exonerated from the crime.

A mental examination may be conducted in some circumstances, particularly in capital trials. There may be a demand that multiple-count trials be heard separately in order to avoid biasing the jury (guilty of the first, more likely that he is guilty of the second).

Deposits can then be made. These are largely out-of-court testimony from witnesses that will serve as the foundation for the defense or prosecution when the trial begins.

Depending on the stage, either of these processes can be considered part of the discovery process. The defendant's record is disclosed at this point, and specific objects of evidence are given over for the defendant's comprehension.

The "Pre-Trial Conference," a relatively new federal rule, is convened to agree on specific criteria throughout the trial. The goal is to speed up the trial and streamline the procedure in general.

The defendant might then request that the case be transferred to another jurisdiction.

Learn more about justice:
brainly.com/question/22967374
#SPJ4

7 0

2 years ago

How does the Fourth Amendment protect individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures by the police? When are there exceptio

sammy [17]

INTERESTS PROTECTED

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides that "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from unreasonable intrusions by the government. However, the Fourth Amendment does not guarantee protection from all searches and seizures, but only those done by the government and deemed unreasonable under the law. To claim violation of Fourth Amendment as the basis for suppressing a relevant evidence, the court had long required that the claimant must prove that he himself was the victim of an invasion of privacy to have a valid standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment. However, the Supreme Court has departed from such requirement, issue of exclusion is to be determined solely upon a resolution of the substantive question whether the claimant's Fourth Amendment rights have been violated, which in turn requires that the claimant demonstrates a justifiable expectation of privacy, which was arbitrarily violated by the government. In general, most warrantless searches of private premises are prohibited under the Fourth Amendment, unless specific exception applies. For instance, a warrantless search may be lawful, if an officer has asked and is given consent to search; if the search is incident to a lawful arrest; if there is probable cause to search and there is exigent circumstance calling for the warrantless search. Exigent circumstances exist in situations where a situation where people are in imminent danger, where evidence faces imminent destruction, or prior to a suspect's imminent escape. On the other hand, warrantless search and seizure of properties are not illegal, if the objects being searched are in plain view. Further, warrantless seizure of abandoned property, or of properties on an open field do not violate Fourth Amendment, because it is considered that having expectation of privacy right to an abandoned property or to properties on an open field is not reasonable. However, in some states, there are some exception to this limitation, where some state authorities have granted protection to open fields. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures protection than what is required by the Fourth Amendment, but states cannot allow conducts that violate the Fourth Amendment. Where there was a violation of one’s fourth amendment rights by federal officials, A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages, resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. Under the Bivens action, the claimant needs to prove that there has been a constitutional violation of the fourth amendment rights by federal officials acting under the color of law. However, the protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

8 0

3 years ago