Answer:
my parents had to pay upwards to 36,000 when i went there
Explanation:
Answer:
Concurrent power
Explanation:
Concurrent power is a political power exercised by both Federal and State government at the same time within the same jurisdiction as it relates to their citizens on a subject matter. Examples of Concurrent power enjoyed by both levels of government are in the area of taxation, environmental protection, election regulation, etc.
Such a step is widely regarded as necessary to make sure video footage is <u>authentic</u>.
<u>Explanation</u>:
Surveillance video camera plays a main role during investigation. Whenever the police department handles a criminal case, they depend on the surveillance video camera to get any clue regarding the crime.
The surveillance cameras in the crime committed areas are thoroughly checked to get the supporting proof.
It is mandatory to get the physical hard drives of the surveillance video cameras to make sure that they have acquired the unedited video. Thus the police can ensure that the evidence provided is authentic.
Answer:
Yes
Explanation:
What the officers did was unconstitutional and violated the 4th amendment. Weeks v. United States established the Exclusionary Rule in 1914. At the time the exclusionary rule was only applied for federal courts instead of all courts. In 1949, Wolf v. Colorado, the High Court ruled that the Exclusionary Rule did not apply to the State but the Fourth Amendment did. In 1961, Mapp v. Ohio, the High Court ruled that the exclusionary rule applies to the state level as well as the federal. Justice Clark said this perfectly, "Thus the State, by admitting evidence unlawfully seized, serves to encourage disobedience to the Federal Constitution which it is bound to uphold....... Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own existence."
