Answer:
low
Explanation:
Which statement about freedoms that each individual should have In American democracy is false?
Americans should have freedom
Americans should have worth.
Americans should have separate but equal facilities.
Which of the following is a sentence that a judge can impose on a defendant at
sentencing (only one correct answer)?
a) Declaratory
b) Expository
c) Probation
d) Thematic
e) Runaway
Answer: C - probation.
Explanation:
once a defendant is found guilty, they can make a number of post-verdict motions. almost all post-verdict motions are granted.
The statement is false. Once the defendant is found guilty in the court, they cannot make a post-verdict motions. It is also not true that almost all post-verdict motions are granted.
When a mistrial is declared, the defendant can still be tried again, and if convicted, he or she has the right to appeal the judge's decision to admit disputed evidence.
A defendant who has been found guilty may appeal the decision on the grounds that the evidence used in court was obtained illegally. The main argument in appeals is that the defendant's constitutional and due process rights were violated.
A criminal appeal could be made if any of the following occurred:
Evidence that shouldn't have been allowed was admittedEvidence that should have been allowed was notSituations where a defense appeal submitted after the decision is permitted include:
Defense contends ineffective legal representationForced self-incrimination or the defense asserts that the confession was extortedDiscover if it is true or false that once the trial ends, the party who received the favorable verdict files a motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict: https://brainly.com/question/11993730
#SPJ4
There are four different aspects of a decision that a business should evaluate in order to maximize profits and be a good corporate citizen. In evaluating the first of the four factors, grey should determine whether his failure to report the results to the food and drug administration is a violation of.
Answer:
1. The legal implications of the decision
2. The public relations impact
3. The safety risks for consumers and employees
4. The financial implications.
Explanation:
In evaluating the first of the four factors, gray should determine whether his failure to report the results to the food and drug administration is a violation of safety and risks of customers and employees.
What is the significance of food and drug administration?Food and drug administration is a practice conducted by federal or state authorities in order to ensure the safety measurements and hygiene concerns in the preparation of foods as well as drugs for medical consumption of the consumers throughout the United States.
The producers of food and drugs are under an obligation to comply with the rules and regulations given under the laws related thereto. This is done to ensure that the safety and risks of customers as well as workers are not violated.
Therefore, the significance regarding food and drug administration has been aforementioned.
Learn more about food and drug administration here:
https://brainly.com/question/2026177
#SPJ2
which of these is a kind of private court system in which parties may have their case heard before someone with judicial experience without waiting for the slower process of public justice? a. arbitration b. mediation c. summary jury trial d. rent-a-judge
Rent-A-Judge is an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) and a private court system in which parties may have their case heard before someone with judicial experience without waiting for the slower process of public justice. Thus, the correct answer is letter D. Rent-A-Judge.
In civil cases, if someone is filthy rich and is in a mad rush, they can absolutely and legally hire their own judge instead of going through the country's backlogged court system.
It is widely speculated that the rent-a-judge system can resolve a dispute that would otherwise require a five-year trial. Unfortunately, private judging or private court system has been referred to as "legal apartheid".
Since arbitration is essentially just the most traditional form of ADR, it cannot be the answer. Additionally, the terms "mediation" and "summary jury trial" are incorrect because, in the former, a mediator meets with the parties and listens to each side's arguments, whereas, in the latter, the parties present their evidence to a judge and jury, who then render an advisory verdict to begin the settlement process.
Find out under what circumstance might a party elect to pursue litigation in lieu of alternative dispute resolution: https://brainly.com/question/25511654
#SPJ4
Which of the following is NOT a behavioral indicator related to Cultural Competency and Responsiveness?
Continually seeking new knowledge related to inclusion, culture, and equity
Advocating for ongoing training related to inclusion, culture, and equity
Implementing changes that foster more equitable and culturally relevant practices
Establishing a program based on equality for all children and staff rather than equity.
The option that is NOT a behavioral indicator related to Cultural Competency and Responsiveness is:
"Establishing a program based on equality for all children and staff rather than equity." (Option D).
Why is the above option not a behavioral indicator of cultural competency?
Option D above is not an indicator of cultural responsiveness and competence because, it focuses on equality rather than equity.
Equality suggests that everyone or a group of people have access to the same resources or opportunities. Equity, on the other hand, is suggestive of the fact that everyone is different and allocates the exact resources and opportunities needed to achieve equal outcomes.
Learn more about cultural competency:
https://brainly.com/question/26054107
#SPJ1
Policing in the United States primarily exists at the ______________ governmental level, usually as an administrative department that is always part of the _____________ branch of that government
Answer:
- goverment
Explanation:
big brain
Answer:
federal- legislative
Explanation:
Educated Guess
Section C
Write appropriate examples, write short
notes on the following
1. Media law
2. Ethics
3. Constitutional Law
4. Normal Legal Exposure
1. Media law- Media Law is defined as "The legislation through which governments regulate the mass media. It includes issues of censorship, copyright, defamation, broadcast law, and antitrust law.
2. Ethics- Ethics, for example, refers to those standards that impose reasonable obligations to refrain from stealing, murder, assault, slander, and fraud.
3. Constitutional Law- Freedom of speech; Freedom of religion; The right to bear arms; Freedom from unreasonable search and seizure; Protection from self-incrimination; Due process of law and the right to a trial by jury; and Equal protection.
4. Normal Legal Exposure- Normal Legal Exposure means exposure which is expected to be received under normal operating conditions of an installation or a source, including possible minor mishaps that can be kept under control.
Freedom is the strength or proper to behave, talk, or assume as one desires without difficulty or restraint, and inside the absence of a despotic government.
Freedom is the power of a sentient being to exercise its will.
Learn more about Freedom
here https://brainly.com/question/13273450
#SPJ9
States’ rights have been associated with conservatism, and national authority has been associated with liberalism. Why?
States' rights have been associated with conservatism, and national authority has been associated with liberalism.
because The expansion of national authority has been associated with social change, usually a liberal purview. The national government has been more willing than state governments to initiate change, such as during the Civil War, when an expansion of national authority led to the end of slavery, or when New Deal policies intervened in a failing economy.
law a: it depends on observable evidence. law b: it does not focus on a natural phenomenon. based on these characteristics, what can you conclude about law a and law b?
Law A is scientific while Law B is societal. A scientific law describes relationships among observable phenomena or observable evidence. Whereas the societal law is enforced by other people and it does not focus on a natural phenomenon.
Because societal laws are kind of legalistic, they are imposed upon us. They basically decide what is and is not allowed. The laws that govern and maintain order in society are known as social laws, and they are created based on the morality of the time. These laws evolve along with the collective human mind.
Meanwhile, scientific laws describe everything we see; they are entirely descriptive. The physical world is governed by scientific laws. A scientific law can only be altered by our environment. They can be relied upon to be correct and true.
Find out how to compare societal laws to scientific laws: https://brainly.com/question/24061606
#SPJ4
under most state statutes, the prosecutor needs to prove two things to get a hate crime conviction. which is not one of the two requirements?
The offender profited from the crime is not one of the requirement when the prosecutor needs to prove to get a hate crime conviction.
To secure a conviction for a hate crime under the majority of state statutes, the prosecutor must demonstrate two elements or requirements:
The victim's individual qualities led to the crime being committed.The criminal did the deed.The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) recommendations were used for the Hate Crimes Statistics Act reporting requirements. Because of this, it is now simple to determine the precise number of hate crimes that are committed.
Bias crimes are offenses that are motivated by hatred against a victim based on race, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or national origin. Hate crimes have historically targeted people of color (POC) and members of particular religious sects.
Discover what the congress passed that amended the Hate Crime Statistics Act to include both physical and mental disabilities in September 1994: https://brainly.com/question/24930032
#SPJ4
You are 21 years old and a German citizen, but a permanent resident of the U.S. You moved to Miami Florida with your parents when you were 4 years old. You have just graduated from college with degrees in English and History. You spent two months last summer in Mexico working with some friends. You have never been arrested or been in the military. Can you become a naturalized citizen? (Yes or No) Explain Why or Why not?
Since you have remained a permanent resident in the United States for more than 5 years (17 years in this case), you can become a naturalized citizen.
What does it take to become a naturalized citizen?After being a permanent resident in the U.S. for five years, one can apply to become a naturalized citizen.
The requirements for becoming a naturalized citizen of the U.S. include:
At least 18 years oldBeing a permanent resident for at least 5 years (or 3 years if you are married to a U.S. citizen)One honorable military serviceKnowledge of U.S. civicsEnglish language proficiencyWillingness to swear allegiance to AmericaMeeting all other eligibility requirements.Thus, you can become a naturalized citizen having met the major requirements.
Learn more about naturalization in the United States at https://brainly.com/question/1869745
#SPJ1
the appellate division of the new york supreme court issues an opinion that can be found at 137 a.d.3d 409, 26 n.y.s.3d 66. "137" is question 8 options:
The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court issues an opinion that can be found at 137 A.D.3d 409, 26 N.Y.S.3d 66. "137" is (A) the number of the volume in the official reports of the court's decisions.
What is Appellate Division?The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, First Judicial Department, established by the New York State Constitution of 1894, is one of four intermediate appellate courts in the State, with jurisdiction over the counties of New York and the Bronx. The New York Supreme Court's Appellate Division issues an opinion, which can be found at 137 A.D.3d 409, 26 N.Y.S.3d 66. The volume number in the official reports of the court's decisions is "137." The Supreme Court has four Appellate Divisions, one in each of the state's four Judicial Departments.Therefore, the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court issues an opinion that can be found at 137 A.D.3d 409, 26 N.Y.S.3d 66. "137" is (A) the number of the volume in the official reports of the court's decisions.
Know more about Appellate Division here:
https://brainly.com/question/22630042
#SPJ4
The complete question is given below:
The Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court issues an opinion that can be found at 137 A.D.3d 409, 26 N.Y.S.3d 66. "137" is
a. the number of the volume in the official reports of the court's decisions.
b. the number of the volume in Thomson Reuter's unofficial publication of the court's decisions.
c. the number of the case in a sequence decided by the court.
d. a page number in the referenced volume.
Hide Feedback
Why was the 6th amendment created?
*In your own words*
Answer:
The 6th amendment was created for the sake of making sure the accused will be able to have a fair trial. Without these regulations, then it would not be fair for the accused, because there would not be much to stop outside parties to make it unfair, as the jury could be completely biased, which would not be fair to the accused in that situation.
(P.S. I do not study law, and have only looked at a summary of the 6th amendment, as well as 'Amdt6.5.5.2' from https://constitution.congress.gov/, so take my words with a grain of salt.)
Detailed statements regarding the first advent can be found throughout the entire old testament. true or false
The above statement is true.
Christ's first advent was when He entered this world as a real human being to rescue sinful mankind. He is the only begotten Son of God.
The Old Testament is the first part of the Bible, and it begins with the creation of the Earth, continues with Noah and the deluge, Moses, and other events, and ends with the expulsion of the Jews to Babylon. The Hebrew Bible, which has its roots in the antiquity of Judaism, is extremely similar to the Old Testament of the Bible.
A few Old Testament prophecies speak about Christ's first advent, when He was born as a person. Others focus on the second advent, which mentioned Messiah's greatest victory.
To learn more about Christianity see:
https://brainly.com/question/855630
#SPJ4
QUESTION 4
The concept of "truth-in-sentencing" is closely associated with which perspective
O a. nonintervention.
O b. rehabilitation.
O c.justice.
O d. crime control.
The concept of "truth-in-sentencing" is closely associated with the perspective of a. nonintervention.
What is "truth-in-sentencing"?"Truth-in-sentencing" is a legal requirement that offenders serve a minimum of 85% of their original sentence before they are considered for parole or early release.
The purpose of "truth-in-sentencing" laws is to ensure that criminal convicts serve a substantial portion of their sentences.
"Truth-in-sentencing" also reduces the discrepancy between an imposed prison sentence and the actual time served.
Thus, the concept of "truth-in-sentencing" is closely associated with the perspective of a. nonintervention until a convict has served the minimum time.
Learn more about "truth-in-sentencing" at https://brainly.com/question/4522269
#SPJ1
What are the elements of an arrest?
Answer:
Arrest consists of three (3) elements: a. Restraint of liberty; b. Intent to make an arrest; c. Comprehension by the detainee that he/she is under arrest
Explanation:
is this what u mean?
Answer:
Restraint of liberty, Intent to make an arrest, and Comprehension by the detainee that he/she is under arrest. brainiest?
(>人<)
Explanation:
An employer can be vicariously liable for the actions of an employee. Explain what this means. Also explain, in general terms, the requirements that must be satisfied for an employer to be vicariously liable.
Answer: See explanation
Explanation:
Vicarious liability simply means holding someone responsible for an offence committee by another person. It should be noted that an employer can be vicariously liable for the actions of an employee when the action or the offence that was committed by the employee was authorised by the employer.
It should also be noted that this does not mean that only the employer is responsible, both the employee and the employer are responsible and both will be punished accordingly if they're found guilty.
The interpretation rule stating that any writing by the parties intended to be the final expression of their agreement may not be contradicted by any oral or written agreements made prior to the writing is called the.
Written agreements made prior to the writing is called the parol evidence rule.
In general, the parol evidence rule prohibits the introduction of evidence of contemporaneous or prior negotiations and agreements that modify, contradict, or vary the contractual terms of the written contract when the written agreement between the parties is meant to be the entire and final embodiment of their agreement.
The meaning of a contract, the parties rights and responsibilities, and whether the contract is ambiguous are all determined by using the laws of contract interpretation. The clear-meaning rule is another name for this principle. The main rule is that, unless the legislation recommends a different interpretation or such a construction results in absurdity, words, phrases, and sentences of a statute are to be taken in their natural, usual, or common grammatical sense. Take the contract at face value and interpret the in question words in accordance with their common meaning as the first rule of contract interpretation. This guideline is most effective when the contract terms are precise and explicit.To learn more about the interpretation rule
https://brainly.com/question/4917278
#SPJ1
A wrongful birth case was recently brought before a court in which a child with smith-lemli-opitz syndrome was born to apparently healthy parents. This syndrome is characterized by a cluster of birth defects including cleft palate, and an array of problems with the reproductive and urinary organs. Originally considered by their physician as having a nongenetic basis, the parents decided to have another child, who was also born with smith-lemli-opitz syndrome. In the role of a genetic counselor, instruct the court about what occurred, including the probability of the parents having two affected offspring, knowing that the disorder is inherited as a recessive trait.
By notifying the parents that birth defects were not genetic, the attending physician most presumably misdiagnosed the very first child's smith-lemli-opitz syndrome.
What exactly is the Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome?Smith-Lemli-Opitz syndrome is a neurocognitive disorder that affects several body systems.
This disorder is distinguished by distinctive facial characteristics, a limited brain size (microcephaly), cognitive impairment as well as learning disabilities, and behavioral difficulties.
In the given circumstance;
Given the birth of a second baby of Smith-Lemli-Opitz disorder, both parents have been most expected carriers for the syndrome's recessive gene.In that case, each of their children has a 25% chance of being affected.Thus, the chance of having two affected children from heterozygous parents is 0.25 × 0.25 = 0.0625, or a little more than 6%.
To know more about genetic disorders, here
brainly.com/question/12555957
#SPJ4
when a judge issues an injunction or orders specific performance, this is an example of the judge’s power.
When a judge issues an injunction or orders a specific performance, this is an example of the judge’s power: TRUE
Who is a judge?A judge is a person who, either alone or as part of a panel of judges, presides over court proceedings. A judge hears all of the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the case's barristers or solicitors, evaluates the parties' credibility and arguments, and then issues a ruling in the case based on their interpretation of the law and their own personal judgment. A judge is expected to preside over the trial impartially and in public.Judges' powers, functions, methods of appointment, discipline, and training differ greatly across jurisdictions. The judge's powers may be shared with a jury in some jurisdictions. The presiding judge is responsible for ensuring that all court proceedings are lawful and orderly.A judge's power is demonstrated when he or she issues an injunction or orders a specific performance.Therefore, the statement "when a judge issues an injunction or orders a specific performance, this is an example of the judge’s power" is TRUE.
Know more about judges here:
https://brainly.com/question/4559559
#SPJ4
The complete question is given below:
when a judge issues an injunction or orders specific performance, this is an example of the judge’s power. TRUE or FALSE
What is the key difference between the constitutional courts and the special courts?.
The main distinction between the constitutional courts and the special courts is that the former only hear cases in a very limited range of circumstances, and their judges are appointed for a set period of time, whereas the latter's primary function is to determine whether challenged laws are, in fact, unconstitutional.
When it comes to interpreting, defending, and upholding the Constitution, the Constitutional Court is referred to as the highest court in the nation. The constitutional courts only deal with constitutional issues, such as situations that raise concerns about how the Constitution should be applied or interpreted.
A special court is a sort of court that is founded outside of the regular judicial system, has judges that are recruited irregularly, and uses an irregular process for making decisions.
In conclusion, the main distinction between the constitutional courts and the special courts is that the former only have a very limited range of jurisdiction and their judges are appointed for a set term, whereas the latter have the primary responsibility for determining whether contested laws are, in fact, unconstitutional.
To know more about Constitutional court and Special court go to https://brainly.com/question/4457052
#SPJ4
protection against claims by victims who suffer lost where the insured is legally responsible
Liability insurance is the protection against claims by victims who suffer lost where the insured is legally responsible.
Insurance is a way of safety from monetary loss. It's far a form of hazard control, broadly speaking used to hedge in opposition to the threat of a contingent or uncertain loss. An entity that provides insurance is called an insurer, a coverage employer, an coverage carrier or an underwriter.
Insurance regulations can cowl up scientific expenses, car harm, loss in business or accidents even as visiting, and so forth. Life insurance and popular insurance are the 2 major styles of insurance. Widespread coverage can similarly be categorized into sub-categories that clubs in various kinds of policies.
Learn more about insurance here:https://brainly.com/question/25855858
#SPJ9
On what day does the constitution state that a new president shall be inaugurated? which amendment establishes this? when must the new congress meet?.
On January 20th the constitution states that a new president shall be inaugurated and this was established by the 20th amendment.
The 20th amendment drawn from the Constitution is specifying the particular term of as being each elected President of the United States. It begins at noon time which is on January 20 of every year followed by the election.
Twentieth Amendment is included in Section 2. As per the amendment, the Congress shall assemble or meet at least once each and every year so that such meeting shall be beginning at noon which will be on the third day of January unless they shall be appointed by law on a different day.
2Oth amendment is commonly known as the “Lame Duck Amendment”. The Twentieth Amendment was generally designed to remove the long period of time excessively so that a defeated president or a particular member of Congress would be continuing for the purpose of serving after his or her bid for reelection as it failed.
The Twentieth Amendment is an amendment proposed by U.S. Constitution that is setting the inauguration date for upcoming new presidential terms as well as the date for new congress sessions.
Learn to know more about the constitutional amendment at
https://brainly.com/question/20336789
#SPJ4
The Rio Grande forms the international border between Texas and Mexico. Over the
years, the Rio Grande has changed its course several times. This has led to a
number of disputes between Texas, New Mexico, and Mexico. The Country club
dispute between Texas and New Mexico was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in
1927.
Why did the Supreme Court act as a trial court in this case?
a. The case involved a federal law
b. The case was between several states as parties.
c. The case was between citizens of different states.
d. The case involved foreign ambassadors and other diplomats.
Answer:
A. The case involved fedural law.
Explanation:
I just took the Unit 7 EOC Prep Assignment (k12
The case involved a federal law did the Supreme Court act as a trial court in this case. Hence, option A is correct.
What border does the Rio Grande form?The Rio Grande is the fifth-largest river in the United States and one of the twenty longest rivers in the world. It runs 1,901 miles from the San Juan Mountains in Colorado to the Gulf of Mexico, making up a 1,255-mile part of the border between the United States and Mexico.
The river begins in the San Juan Mountains of Colorado and travels through the center of New Mexico before heading south. South of El Paso, Texas, the Rio Grande parallels the border between the United States and Mexico. Before reaching Brownsville and the Gulf of Mexico, it creates a delta.
The Rio Grande here acts as the border before reaching El Paso, where it will become the international border.
Thus, option A is correct.
For more information about Rio Grande form, click here:
https://brainly.com/question/15481707
#SPJ2
Describe in your own words how a bill becomes a law. You MUST use at least 3 complete sentences.
I'll try to put it in the simplest terms,
After each the House and Senate have approved a bill in identical kind, the bill is shipped to the President. If the President approves of the legislation, it's signed and becomes law.
Hope it helps!<3
Explain the difference between the law of definite proportions and the law of multiple proportions.
The difference is -
The Law of Definite Proportions (as well as Proust's Law) states that the ratio of a single chemical compound's constituent parts is a fixed whole number ratio.Once two or more components/elements have multiple ways of combining to form different compounds, the Law of Multiple Proportions applies.What is Law of Definite Proportions?The composition of high purity compounds is a fixed ratio of elements by mass, according to the law of definite proportions. The law is said to have been published by Joseph Proust.
The implications of this law are that the mass ratio of the elements in a compound remains constant regardless of its source or amount.The percent composition of a part of a compound refers to its mass ratio.% mass = (mass of element/mass of compound) x100 is the equation related to the Law of Definite Proportions.What is Law of multiple proportions?According to the law of multiple proportions, when two elements combine to form and over one compound, the weights of one element combine with such a fixed weight of the other in a ratio of small whole numbers.
According to the law of definite proportions, also known as Proust's law or the law of definable composition, a chemical compound always includes a same proportion of elements by mass.To know more about Law of multiple proportions, here
https://brainly.com/question/24443630
#SPJ4
it can be difficult to predict with certainty how a court will apply a given law to a particular action.
It is true to claim that it can be difficult to predict with certainty how a court will apply a given law to a particular action.
Companies cannot guarantee decisions as ethical by putting their own interpretation of the law in writing because it may be unclear how a court will interpret and apply a law.
Additionally, predicting a court case's outcome is challenging due to judicial error.
The typical justifications include the ambiguity of the evidence at hand, the complexity of the applicable law, the caliber of the prosecution's case, the unknowable biases of the evidences, and so forth.
Be aware, however, that because not all ethical requirements are codified in law, compliance with the law is not always sufficient to determine what constitutes "right" behavior.
Learn about the characteristics of the supreme court that allow the law to be both predictable and flexible: https://brainly.com/question/5537619
#SPJ4
Electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information is considered.
Electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
What is economic espionage?Economic espionage includes electronic hacking and illegal trespassing to obtain a competitor's proprietary information. Economic espionage is defined as the illegal or covert targeting or acquisition of sensitive financial, trade, or economic policy information; proprietary economic information; or technological information. Using bribery, cyber-attacks, "dumpster diving," and wiretapping. Creating seemingly innocent relationships with US companies in order to gather economic intelligence, including trade secrets.President Clinton signed the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 into law. It criminalizes the theft or misappropriation of trade secrets. It is notable for being the first federal statute to broadly define and severely punish such misappropriation and theft.
Therefore, electronic hacking and illegal trespassing for the purposes of acquiring a competitor’s proprietary information are considered economic espionage.
Know more about economic espionage here:
https://brainly.com/question/28218496
#SPJ4
A husband and wife own a vineyard as tenants by the entirety. Without consulting each other, the
husband transfers his interest in the vineyard to his brother by quitclaim deed, and the wife
mortgages her interest to her sister in exchange for a loan. What interest, if any, does the sister
have?
It may be adjudged that since the husband and wife both own interests in the property, the sister now has an interest in the property by virtue of the principle of real estate lien. Note however that the sister's interest is limited to the extent of the wife's interest in the property.
What is a real estate lien?
A lien refers to a legal claim against property that can be used as collateral to repay a debt. Depending on the type of debt owed, liens can be attached to real property, such as a home, or personal property, such as a car or furniture.
What is the implication of a lien?In this case, it means that if the property is liquidated, the sister will be satisfied to the full extent of the loan that the wife took from her.
In some cases, a clause that states "First Loss Payee" in favor of the person who now has interest, that is, the sister, will be inserted into the loan agreement transferring the interest on the property to the sister.
Learn more about lien:
https://brainly.com/question/14619440
#SPJ1