As a young man was leaving his home, two police officers approached him and placed him under arrest for the robbery of a convenience store. As the young man was entering the squad car, he yelled to his girlfriend, “Call my lawyer and tell her what happened; I don’t want to sign anything without her.” The young man was given Miranda warnings on the way to the police station. Meanwhile, his lawyer called the station and told the desk sergeant that she was on her way and to have the young man call her as soon as he arrived. She told the sergeant not to allow questioning until she arrived, and the sergeant assured her that it would be several hours until the district attorney arrived and no questioning would take place until then. When the young man arrived at the station, the arresting officers immediately put him in an interrogation room and questioned him about a carjacking that had taken place two days ago. They did not inform him of the call from his lawyer, but he agreed to talk as long as he did not have to put anything in writing or sign anything without her okay. He made incriminating statements about the carjacking, and he was eventually indicted for that crime as well. Prior to trial on the convenience store robbery charge, the young man’s lawyer moved to suppress the arresting officers’ testimony about the young man’s statements. How should the court rule on the motion?

A defendant has been charged with embezzle- ment. At trial, the prosecutor seeks to cross- examine the defendant about his five-year-old conviction for misdemeanor forgery. Is the prosecutor’s proposed cross-examination proper?

The defendant was on trial for possession of methamphetamines. Charges against the drug dealer who sold the pills to the defendant were dropped in exchange for his testimony against the defendant. The defendant denied knowing that the pills he purchased were illegal drugs. At trial, the drug dealer testified that he told the defendant before the sale that the pills were illegal methamphetamines. The drug dealer died on the stand, prior to the defense counsel’s opportunity to cross-examine him. The defense counsel moved for admission of the drug dealer’s testimony at the defendant’s pretrial hearing that he told the defendant that the pills were not illegal. The prosecutor had an opportunity to cross-examine the drug dealer during the hearing. Should this testimony be admitted?

The defendant was pulled over for speeding. After a license plate check revealed that the car was recently reported as stolen, the defendant was arrested for car theft. At the police station, the defendant received Miranda warnings and agreed to answer questions regarding a local auto “chop-shop” network. During a break for lunch, the police interrogators noticed that the defendant, who was otherwise rather shabbily dressed, was wearing an obviously expensive watch. On their return to the interrogation room, without giving any new Miranda warnings, the officers began interrogating the defendant about a recent home invasion where a quantity of valuable jewelry was taken, including a watch similar to the one the defendant was wearing. The defendant confessed to the home invasion, and was indicted on that charge, a felony. If the defendant files an appropriate motion to prevent the confession from being admitted at his trial, is the defendant likely to succeed?

Pojedete na hory na jeden týden v lednu.

Screenshot_15-3-2025_183840_southplainscollege582-my.sharepoint.com.jpeg How many carbon atoms are in R-134a? 

Screenshot_15-3-2025_183840_southplainscollege582-my.sharepoint.com.jpeg How many fluorine atoms are in R-134a?

When servicing an A2L unit, technicians should verify that the refrigerant cylinder being used is certified by _____ as safe to use with mildly flammable refrigerants. 

A halogenated refrigerant classification with a high ODP and no longer manufactured since 1995 describes _____. 

A refrigerant classification with a moderate ODP level but high GWP with a phaseout scheduled for 2030 describes _____.