Answer to Question 1
a
Answer to Question 2
Court ruled that compulsory self-identification to law enforcement personnel was not unconstitutional and was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibitions against unreasonable searches and seizures nor was it a violation of the Fifth Amendment's protection from self-incrimination. In a nutshell, the Court ruled that compulsory disclosure of identification did not violate the Fourth Amendment because (1) it served an important government interest; (2) it was immediately relevant to the original purpose of a Terry stop; (3) the threat of criminal sanction was necessary for compliance; and (4) such a request would not alter the nature of the stop itself. In addition, the Court ruled that such compulsion did not violate the Fifth Amendment because the disclosure of identity, in and of itself, did not reasonably pose a danger of the self-incrimination forbidden by the statute. Thus, the Court ruled that in temporary investigative detentions, state statutes that require self-identification by private citizens are constitutional.
Diagram of the life cycle of Plasmodium falciparum, the causative agent of malaria
An electrochemical cell is based on these two half-reactions
Butterfly life cycle stages June 6 2023
Life cycle of Pisum sativum
Life cycle of a moss (Polytrichum)
The lytic and lysogenic life cycles of a temperate bacteriophage