This topic contains a solution. Click here to go to the answer

Author Question: In the case of Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that A) improperly collected evidence ... (Read 40 times)

Jramos095

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 528
In the case of Miranda v. Arizona, the Supreme Court ruled that
 
  A) improperly collected evidence cannot be introduced in court.
   B) the police must inform suspects of their rights.
   C) guidelines to protect jurors from biased news coverage must be established.
   D) indigent defendants are guaranteed legal counsel.
   E) defendants have the right to a speedy trial.

Question 2

The spoils system did not work well because it did not suit the needs of political parties.
 
  Indicate whether the statement is true or false



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
Marked as best answer by a Subject Expert

izzat

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 328
Answer to Question 1

B

Answer to Question 2

FALSE




Jramos095

  • Member
  • Posts: 528
Reply 2 on: Jul 9, 2018
Great answer, keep it coming :)


alexanderhamilton

  • Member
  • Posts: 334
Reply 3 on: Yesterday
Gracias!

 

Did you know?

The human body produces and destroys 15 million blood cells every second.

Did you know?

Your heart beats over 36 million times a year.

Did you know?

To combat osteoporosis, changes in lifestyle and diet are recommended. At-risk patients should include 1,200 to 1,500 mg of calcium daily either via dietary means or with supplements.

Did you know?

Prostaglandins were first isolated from human semen in Sweden in the 1930s. They were so named because the researcher thought that they came from the prostate gland. In fact, prostaglandins exist and are synthesized in almost every cell of the body.

Did you know?

Human kidneys will clean about 1 million gallons of blood in an average lifetime.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library