Answer:
The decision of the Supreme Court on Steagald v United States (1981) established that according to the Fourth Amendment, police officers can´t search for a suspect in a third party´s property without getting a search warrant first.
Explanation:
According to the Supreme Court, the search carried in the house of the petitioner, Gary Keith Steagald, which was conducted only with an arrest warrant for Ricky Lyons, and led to Steagald´s arrest, was a violation of the exclusionary rule stated in the Fourth Amendment that protects all citizens from illegal searches and seizures. I do agree with this decision because any effort to apprehend a suspect should never infringe nor his or a third party´s constitutional rights.
Answer:
Phineas
you user the app because I'm a tutor and it helps
Answer:c.)
Most cultures do not differ on questions of morality.
Explanation:
Answer:
All states in the contemporary world, including great powers, are compelled to justify their behavior according to legal rules and accepted norms. This essay will analyse the extent to which states comply and the reasons for their compliance. Essentially, the extent to which states follow their international obligations has developed over the past 400 years.
Explanation:
Answer:
19. Paula’s boyfriend moved to her hometown, Oklahoma City, from Houston, Texas. Two weeks after he arrived, he asked her to phone his bank in Houston and inquire about his balance. She did so as a favor to him and found out the balance was more than $40,000. As soon as she told him, he left and drove to Houston to remove it from his account. In Houston, he was arrested by the FBI for fraud and several related crimes. Paula was then charged with the federal crime of making a phone call across state lines for the furtherance of a fraudulent scheme. Her boyfriend only knew the scheme had been successful by Paula’s report of the large balance in his old account. What would be a possible defense for Paula?
Explanation:
