The miranda rule states that select one:
a. the police must obtain a warrant before searching a home for evidence.
b. all accused persons are entitled to a fair and speedy trial.
c. the police must read a suspect his or her rights before questioning.
d. a person cannot be forced to confess to a crime under duress.

The owner of a one-acre parcel of land with a small house on it rented the property to a professor of a nearby college at a monthly rental of $500. several years later, after the professor got tenure, the parties orally agreed that the professor would purchase the property from the owner for the sum of $60,000, payable at the rate of $500 a month for 10 years. they agreed that the owner would give the professor a deed to the property after five years had passed and $30,000 had been paid toward the purchase price, and that the professor would execute a note secured by a mortgage for the balance. the professor continued in possession of the property and made all monthly payments in a timely fashion. when he had paid $30,000, he tendered a proper note and mortgage to the property owner and demanded that she deliver the deed as agreed. the owner refused because valuable minerals had been discovered on adjacent parcels in recent months, causing the value of this parcel of land to increase to 10 times its former value. the professor brought suit against the property owner for specific performance. if the court rules in favor of the property owner, what is the likely reason?

Which statement best describes a literary analysis? a literary analysis combines the writer's own opinions about a text with evidence from the text. a literary analysis contains only facts from a text and should not contain opinions. a literary analysis requires research from many sources of information to support an argument a literary analysis summarizes a text and makes a recommendation for others to read it.

Which best explains why the supreme court’s decision in plessy v. ferguson was unconstitutional? the supreme court’s ruling allowed states to deny equal protection to any person within its jurisdiction. since the 14th amendment did not make concessions for people born outside the us, the supreme court’s decision could not be applied. the supreme court’s decision gave individual states the freedom to make their own laws in relation to non-whites. since segregation laws did not provide equal protections or liberties to non-whites, the ruling was not consistent with the 14th amendment.