54

This is pretty much the entire purpose of a redirect, and almost always permissible. If your witness has given an unhelpfully incomplete answer, it is not just "advisable" to ask those follow-up questions, but perhaps mandatory as an ethical matter.


32

Yes, it's actally happened. Several outfits have filed cases by the hundreds, and they were even literally photocopies. And it works rather well, until one victim stands up for what's right - and then the house of cards comes tumbling down. Molski For instance, due to a minor ADA issue (toilet paper roll 2" too low etc.) poor Jarek Molski was injured ...


21

No. Police are not permitted to impose any punishment whatsoever. Their role in the American justice system is to prevent and investigate criminal offenses. What you're describing is a punishment for a criminal offense, even though it is imposed outside the criminal justice system. The same principles that prevent an officer from punching a suspect in the ...


20

There is no limit, per se, but intentional disruption of the courts is regarded as Vexatious Litigation and in some countries (the UK for example) the court may prohibit a person from making any further applications or carrying out litigation without permission. Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary. ...


18

If you consent, the evidence can almost certainly be used against you. Florida v. Bostick, 501 U.S. 429 (1991) ("Even when officers have no basis for suspecting a particular individual, they may generally ask questions of that individual, ask to examine the individual's identification, and request consent to search.") If you refuse consent, it is ...


13

It depends on whether this is a brief stop, or an arrest. If you are under arrest (no warrant required), a basic frisking for officer safety is legal and does not require your consent. If you are briefly detained in an investigatory stop, (see Arizona v. Johnson, 555 U.S. 323) to proceed from a stop to a frisk, the police officer must reasonably suspect ...


11

What if someone purposefuly tries to file a court case every minute to disrupt the court can the person be punished in India or USA? There is no official rate limit, but in the USA that person might be blacklisted as vexatious litigant. This blacklisting triggers a "filter-out" process intended to validate that the lawsuit is not blatantly ...


8

First, while most US court systems do have rules against frivolous lawsuits, most judges are loathed to employ them because the punishment is that the vexatious litigant would be denied the use of courts for when they do actually have a case of merit. Declaring someone a vexatious litigant also does not 100% block someone from filing suits. Normally they can ...


6

In a lawful stop, the officer does not need you consent to do this. They do, however, need a reason to suspect you have or are about to commit a crime. They cannot stop you solely for the purpose of performing the frisk. If you have been stopped and the officer has reason to believe you are armed and dangerous, they may perform a frisk. This is a particular ...


6

One approach is to sue the (state) government, to see if the state or US Supreme Courts agree. This is probably the most complicated way to get what you want, because it involves a lot of legal arguing, but you don't need a lot of people to agree with you, you just need the right people agreeing with you. Another approach is to change the relevant state ...


6

In the case New York Times Co. v. United States, the court issued a brief per curiam opinion basically saying that the NYT won, and then each justice wrote a separate concurrence or dissent. A few justices did join each others' opinions, and in particular, Justice Harlan's dissent was joined by both of the other two dissenters (who also wrote separately). On ...


5

Perhaps. The relevant law is assembled into notes on 3 USC 102. The original act of 1963 defines President-elect in this manner: (c) The terms 'President-elect' and 'Vice-President-elect' as used in this Act shall mean such persons as are the apparent successful candidates for the office of President and Vice President, respectively, as ascertained by the ...


5

Yes. Yes. American Indians and Alaska Natives have the right to vote just as all other U.S. citizens do. They can vote in presidential, congressional, state and local, and tribal elections, if eligible. And, just as the federal government and state and local governments have the sovereign right to establish voter eligibility criteria, so do tribal ...


5

A judge can only impose sentences as prescribed by law. Suppose, as a random example, that a person is convicted in federal court of fraudulently mutilating coins, in violation of 18 USC 331. That section of the statute states the punishment for such a violation: ...Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. The scale ...


4

In general, knowingly making a false statement as part of a commercial or financial transaction, or as part of a contract, with the intention that the other party will rely on that statement and be harmed by this is likely to be fraud. However, there are some limitations. For the lie to be common-law fraud: The other party must in fact rely on the false ...


4

What distinguishes a civilian charge of treason versus being an enemy combatant? Nationality. Someone who is not a US national cannot commit treason against the US, because treason is a breach of allegiance, and non-nationals do not owe allegiance. The ruling you mention is not concerned with treason because the defendant is not a national of the United ...


4

They were there at the invitation the government of Vietnam This is the justification. The government of South Vietnam was the internationally recognised government of South Vietnam (at least by the USA and it’s allies - it’s not a requirement of international law to be recognised by everyone). They were engaged in counter-insurgency against internal rebels. ...


4

Yes. The precedent is President Gerald Ford's pardon of his predecessor Richard Nixon in proclamation 4311 before any possible prosecution had started. The pardon was granted specifically to prevent the disturbance of "the tranquility to which the nation has been restored" by "the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United ...


3

The 8th Amendment is much stronger in prohibiting types of punishment than in prohibiting disproportionate punishments. Corporal punishment such as a slap on the hand, is per se prohibited under the 8th Amendment as punishment for a criminal offense, whether or not the consent of the person upon whom it is imposed is obtained (subject to narrow exceptions ...


3

I'm not aware of it invoking, but a careful read of the 13th Amendment will find there's an exception to the slavery ban: Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. This means that prisoners ...


3

A few things here. The patent to you link is actually just the Chinese filing of an original US patent by microsoft https://patents.google.com/patent/US7661074B2/en Both the US and the Chinese version have been granted in 2010 and they are currently active. So yes, it's a real patent. The patent appears to be somewhat "weak", it took 5 years to be ...


3

Most of the implications here are political, not legal. For that, you'd have to ask Politics.SE. The law, however, is quite clear: If the President is alive, and "a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide" do not invoke the 25th amendment, the President would ...


3

Of course Native Americans can vote. See It’s time to recognize the forgotten Americans who helped elect Joe Biden - The Washington Post. Some Indian Tribes may have varying amounts of sovereignty (Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia) and some their own legal systems, and their right to vote was piecemeal until 1924, but they are US citizens ...


3

They can and do (arguably) Because prison inmates can be forced to work (involuntary servitude) a sentence of imprisonment is de facto a sentence of slavery. When people think of slavery in the context of the United States they think of chattel slavery as practiced in the antebellum South. However, while this type of slavery is at one of the extremes, ...


3

There is no such restriction. At the time the Constitution was written it was the common practice to use "he" for a person of unknown or unspecified sex. The use of that word cannot be taken to imply a restriction to males. If it were not settled before, the 19th Amendment granting voting rights to all adult women would have settled the matter. ...


2

Yes and No The Supreme Court can decide which cases they hear and which they don’t. This is actually a very common feature of the highest courts in jurisdictions around the world. However, intermediate appellate courts do not have this discretion - they must hear any appeal put to them - sometimes, very briefly. They do not have to give reasons why or why ...


2

Is there any precedent for what happens when entire countries and jurisdictions where contracts were made cease to exist? I cannot answer from a historical perspective. From a legal standpoint, though, the contract ought to be enforced in accordance with the parties' intent and knowledge that can be inferred from when the contract was formed. The original ...


2

Focusing only on the question of getting a new, valid birth certificate, it depends on the state where the birth is registered, and when you do this. Right now, the situation in Washington state is described here: the bar is quite low and you can do it online. The law changes on Jan. 1, to this, which involves more restrictions on who can apply. Even under ...


2

Adults are bound to contracts with minors The technical term is that a contract with a minor is that it is voidable by the minor unless it is subject to the exemptions - a contract for necessities or a contract of benefit to the minor (e.g. a reasonable mobile phone contract). Until the minor chooses to void it, it is binding on everyone involved. They can ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible