Answer:
<h3>The answer is true.</h3>
Explanation:
In the US, the states have jurisdiction over any crime which may take place within a state's jurisdiction and territory. Both the state court as well as the federal trial court of a particular state may issue a warrant to a non-domicile/out of a state party to appear before the court.
For instance, if an person from Nevada attends a concert in Colorado and gets into a brawl while still in Nevada, he/she will be convicted of assault and battery in Nevada court itself.
In such cases, the defendants may hire an attorney from that particular state to represent him in the court.
Investigation
Charging
Initial Hearing/Arraignment
Discovery
Plea Bargaining
Preliminary Hearing
Pre-Trial Motions
Trial
Post-Trial Motions
Sentencing
Appeal
Answer:
Change lanes to the right when it is safe to do so
Answer:
Exclusionary Rule.
Explanation:
The exclusionary rule is a legal rule of the constitution that prevents any illegal search and seizure of 'evidence' that is collected in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution. It also prevents the presentation of such 'evidence' in a court of law.
This rule also states that any evidence collected in violation of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) may not be admissible in a court of law as legal evidence as it is 'seized' in violation of the person's constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution prevents the government from doing any search or seizure of 'evidence' of a person's home without due reasonable reason. Thus, it prevents a person's from being forcefully searched. So, when such searches are done and evidence produced before the court, they are not admissible under the exclusionary rule.
Explanation:
It basically gives a false represention
-that smoking gun evidence is the only form of evidence that can prove something beyond reasonable doubt
-it makes people biased against criminals
Basically those are my thoughts but there are probably more
