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
miskamm [114]
2 years ago
10

If you were a defense attorney, what would you want the jurors to know about the limits of forensic evidence?

Law
1 answer:
n200080 [17]2 years ago
6 0

The results indicate that the 10 pieces of evidence mock jurors reported would be most important when deciding a verdict are (in order of importance): (1) DNA, (2) fingerprints, (3) weapon, (4) video records, (5) crime-scene photos, (6) gunshot residue, (7) other bodily secretions, (8) video confession, (9) forensic ...

You might be interested in
What should be the punishment of those who eat pizza with pineaplle
Thepotemich [5.8K]

Answer:

Let them have cheese on their pineapples along with plenty of salt

Explanation:

5 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Imagine the white car in the left lane is moving more slowly than the surrounding traffic. How is this a violation of state unif
Aloiza [94]

This is a violation of state uniform law due to the fact that it has been established that vehicles moving slower than the traffic have to be in the right lane.

<h3>What is the state uniform traffic law?</h3>

These are laws that have been established in states in the United States for motor vehicles. These laws have been set to be the comprehensive standards in the states.

These Uniform traffic laws have been set to be followed all through the state that it is applied.

Read more on traffic violation here:

brainly.com/question/22640490

6 0
3 years ago
A dealer in U.S. government securities quotes a 5-year Treasury note at 89.12-89.16. In dollars, that represents a spread of
Korolek [52]

Answer:

money

Explanation:

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
What did Dr. Umberger do to prove Dr. Coppolino’s guilt?
Dmitry_Shevchenko [17]

Answer:

Murderer

Characteristics: Poisoner - Parricide

Number of victims: 1 +

Date of murder: August 28, 1965

Date of birth: 1933

Victim profile: His wife, Dr. Carmela Musetto, 32

Method of murder: Poisoning (anaesthetic succinylcholine chloride)

Location: New Jersey/Florida, USA

Status: Sentenced to life in prison on April 28, 1967. Paroled in 1979

 

Motive: So that he could marry his lover.

Crime: Coppolino was charged with killing his wife, Carmela at their home on Florida's Gulf of Mexico coast. He was also tried for murdering Colonel William E. Farber, the husband of his ex-lover Marjorie. However, he was acquitted from this offence.

Method: Coppolino gave Carmela an overdose in the form of an injection of the anaesthetic succinylcholine chloride.

Sentence: Coppolino was charged with second degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He served 12 years, before being let out for good behaviour.

Interesting facts: An overdose of succinylcholine chloride is difficult to detect in the body, as succinic acid and choline are found naturally in the body. To be able to prove this was the cause of Carmela's death, toxicologst Dr Joseph Umberger had to devise a test, which in June 1966 he succeeded in doing.

Coppolino was an experienced anaesthetist, who had had to give up work at an early age due to ill health. So he had the knowledge and the means to kill Carmela in this way.

It was claimed that Coppolino had also killed Farber in the same way. When he was exhumed, it was discovered that his cricoid cartilage was fractured, which suggested that he had been strangled. In court it was claimed that this damage could have occurred during exhumation, and that he had sufficient arteriosclerosis to have died of a heart attack, as was originally supposed.

3 0
3 years ago
What does the Supreme Court have the power to do?
Ipatiy [6.2K]

Answer:

A lot!

Explanation:

Supreme Court Background

Article III of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary. Article III, Section I states that "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Although the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, it permits Congress to decide how to organize it. Congress first exercised this power in the Judiciary Act of 1789. This Act created a Supreme Court with six justices. It also established the lower federal court system.

The Justices

Over the years, various Acts of Congress have altered the number of seats on the Supreme Court, from a low of five to a high of 10. Shortly after the Civil War, the number of seats on the Court was fixed at nine. Today, there is one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices of the United States Supreme Court. Like all federal judges, justices are appointed by the President and are confirmed by the Senate. They, typically, hold office for life. The salaries of the justices cannot be decreased during their term of office. These restrictions are meant to protect the independence of the judiciary from the political branches of government.

The Court's Jurisdiction

Article III, Section II of the Constitution establishes the jurisdiction (legal ability to hear a case) of the Supreme Court. The Court has original jurisdiction (a case is tried before the Court) over certain cases, e.g., suits between two or more states and/or cases involving ambassadors and other public ministers. The Court has appellate jurisdiction (the Court can hear the case on appeal) on almost any other case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law. Some examples include cases to which the United States is a party, cases involving Treaties, and cases involving ships on the high seas and navigable waterways (admiralty cases).

Cases

When exercising its appellate jurisdiction, the Court, with a few exceptions, does not have to hear a case. The Certiorari Act of 1925 gives the Court the discretion to decide whether or not to do so. In a petition for a writ of certiorari, a party asks the Court to review its case. The Supreme Court agrees to hear about 100-150 of the more than 7,000 cases that it is asked to review each year.

Judicial Review

The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).

In this case, the Court had to decide whether an Act of Congress or the Constitution was the supreme law of the land. The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus (legal orders compelling government officials to act in accordance with the law). A suit was brought under this Act, but the Supreme Court noted that the Constitution did not permit the Court to have original jurisdiction in this matter. Since Article VI of the Constitution establishes the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land, the Court held that an Act of Congress that is contrary to the Constitution could not stand. In subsequent cases, the Court also established its authority to strike down state laws found to be in violation of the Constitution.

Before the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment (1869), the provisions of the Bill of Rights were only applicable to the federal government. After the Amendment's passage, the Supreme Court began ruling that most of its provisions were applicable to the states as well. Therefore, the Court has the final say over when a right is protected by the Constitution or when a Constitutional right is violated.

Role

The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review, it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans, i.e., freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and due process of law.

5 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • - The American Medical Association classifies alcohol as:
    14·1 answer
  • The speaker argues that just because these men have been locked up, they shouldn't be locked out of their kids' lives. Do you ag
    8·1 answer
  • How would you compare and constrast the theories of Locke and montesquieu
    9·1 answer
  • Why does Article I of the Constitution forbid the government from passing ex post facto laws
    11·1 answer
  • If a juvenile throws a rock at a neighbor is that considered domestic disturbance?​
    15·1 answer
  • Military discipline is vital to the combat readiness of any military force. What does discipline stand for?
    14·2 answers
  • The right of the government to pass laws which affect the usage of property is?
    5·1 answer
  • I need help with this-!
    10·2 answers
  • Anyone become my big sister please <br><br><br>myself Aditya Sharma age 16 standard 11 arts​
    13·2 answers
  • The American criminal trial system is based on the notion that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty. Do you t
    5·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!