Turn off the ignition , turn on your flashers and roll your window down
Answer:
A. Fails to distinguish between violent defendants and one that no longer pose a danger to society.
C. Fails to differentiate between mental illness that are temporary or lifelong conditions.
Explanation:
M'Naghten Rule is an insanity defense used by defendant's attorney to plead defendant not guilty of crime due to mental conditions suffered during the time crime committed.
M'Naghten Rule states that a defendant will be pleaded not guilty only under conditions when it will be proved that the mental condition of defendant was not right at the time when crime was committed and that he/she was not able to discern his/her actions as right or wrong.
The criticism received to the M'Naghten rule is that it fails to distinguish between defendants who pose threat to the society and those who do not pose threat any longer. Another criticism is that it fails to distinguish between mental illness that are temporary or conditions which are lifelong.
Therefore, option A and C are correct.
If it has been previously <u>suspended and reinstated</u>, your license will be suspended for accumulating <u>8 points</u> within three years.
<h3>What is a license suspension?</h3>
A license suspension involves the taking away of a license or privilege for some period.
Some license suspensions may be <u>definite</u> while others are <u>indefinite</u>.
Thus, while the first-time suspension is based on the accumulation of 12 points within three years, a subsequent suspension is based on 8 points.
Learn more about license suspension at brainly.com/question/13112961
Courts applying the Davis exception most often summarize it with phrases such as "ongoing emergency" or "emergency situation." When police are responding to an ongoing emergency, their motive is to ensure the safety of all concerned, not to collect evidence. The Supreme Court ruled in Davis that statements elicited by police while responding to an ongoing emergency are not testimonial for purposes of the Confrontation Clause.
Testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-ITlooks like the kind of testimony that would be offered at trial in aid of prosecution;
-It is made when the circumstances objectively indicate that there is no ongoing emergency; and
-The primary purpose of the interrogation is to establish or prove past events potentially relevant to a later criminal prosecution.
The Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution protects the right of a criminal defendant to be confronted by his or her accusers in Court and to cross-examine any testimony that they may offer. The admission of hearsay (an out-of-court statement) – even if admissible under an exception to the rule against hearsay – can be in direct conflict with the right of Confrontation.
On the other hand, “non-testimonial” hearsay is a statement that:
-It is made primarily for the purpose of assisting police to meet an ongoing emergency; or
-It was made primarily for a purpose other than discovering, establishing or proving past events potentially relevant to later criminal prosecution.
To learn more about Testimony visit here ; brainly.com/question/29244222?referrer=searchResultssearchResults
#SPJ4
