Answer:
The correct answer is C. A judge could throw out the teen's confession unless the officer complies with the ruling in Miranda v. Arizona.
Explanation:
Miranda v. Arizona is a ruling of the United States Supreme Court from 1966. The case established the current practice whereby a suspect is required to read his or her rights (the so-called Miranda rights) without exception, which state the right to before a preliminary investigation of the suspect has begun.
That was the decision in Ernesto Miranda's trial. Miranda was arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and sexual assault of an 18-year-old girl on prima facie evidence. After two hours of questioning, Miranda signed the confession. However, he had never been informed of the possibility of meeting a legal adviser or of being silent, and that his confession could not be used against him. During the trial, Miranda's attorney, Alvin Moore, argued that confession would therefore not apply in court. Moore's objection was rejected and Miranda was sentenced to a lengthy prison sentence. The Arizona Supreme Court also upheld the ruling.
The United States Supreme Court, by a vote of 5 to 4, ruled that, due to the Fifth and Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, no confession would be valid unless the suspect was informed of his rights. The Fifth Amendment states that no one can be compelled to testify against himself and the Sixth Addendum secures access to a lawyer. Ernesto Miranda's judgment was overturned, but he was later sentenced to prison for the same case, based on other evidence.
<span>This result proposes that private parties (consumers and producers) can solve the problem of externalities on their own. = <span>Coase theorem.
</span>Coase theorem proposes that "</span><span>when there is a disagreement about property rights, those parties concerned can find a way to come to a mutually beneficial outcome by means of bargaining or negotiating terms," according to its definition.</span><span>
</span>
According to Khrushchev the results of the US remained unknown and a bit complicated. Khrushchev said the U.S. was setting up military blocs with other countries so that it could gain a dominant position in the capitalist world. They claimed as Khrushchev would put it that they were doing so to defend themselves against communist threat but that, according to him was based on a lie. In addition, the arms race was supposed to result in a balance of power.
However, it was obvious that a move like that could easily lead to war. In simple words, he thinks that U.S. is a capitalist state and would start a World War III. As is evident today, when nations start competing among themselves and start showcasing who has military might than the other, the danger of war increases.
Answer:
B
Explanation:
B. obtain IACUC approval for the change
