Under Texas law, defenses take a variety of forms. A type of defense that the prosecutor must disprove in establishing the elements of the crime is known as an affirmative defense.
This means that the defendant's guilt is established when the prosecutor proves beyond a reasonable doubt all the elements of the crime. The defendant must then provide evidence to support the affirmative defense.
The jury must then determine if the defendant's evidence proves their defense by a preponderance of the evidence, which is a lower standard than the prosecutor's beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
An example of an affirmative defense is self-defense. A defendant can claim that their use of force was necessary to defend themselves against harm, and the prosecutor must disprove this to establish the defendant's guilt.
Texas law defenses can be grouped into two main categories: those that negate an element of the crime, and those that are affirmative defenses. Defenses that negate an element of the crime will result in the defendant's acquittal if the prosecutor fails to prove all the elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
For example, if the defendant can prove that they did not have the requisite intent to commit the crime, then the prosecutor cannot establish the guilt of the defendant.
Another example of a negation defense is alibi. If the defendant can provide an alibi for their where abouts at the time of the crime, then the prosecutor must disprove this to establish the defendant's guilt.
In summary, affirmative defenses require the defendant to provide evidence to support their defense, while defenses that negate an element of the crime result in the defendant's acquittal if the prosecutor cannot prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
To know more about Texas law refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/8610964#
#SPJ11
a loss occurs when an individual breaks into a safe and leaves visible signs of forcible entry best describes
Burglary is defined as a forced entry into or exit from an insured's property with the purpose of stealing the insured's property. Forced entry or exit must be clearly visible.
Should a person be returned to their previous financial situation when a loss occurs?Indemnity, A common legal rule relating to insurance that states that the person receiving benefits under an insurance policy should be put back in roughly the same financial situation as before the loss.
A loss sustained form is what?These forms are preferred because under a "loss discovered" form, regardless of when the act or loss occurred, coverage is applied to losses that are discovered during the policy period. • When a loss is really experienced, coverage is applied using a "loss sustained" form.
To know more about Loss occurs visit:-
https://brainly.com/question/20526582
#SPJ9
The complete question is below:-
A loss that occurs when an individual breaks into a safe and leaves visible signs of forcible entry best describes
a. Burglary
b. Robbery
c. Mysterious disappearance
d. Larceny
with reference to the damage to doe and wick's motor vehicle, calculate who must pay whom and what would be the amount in damage
Jane Doe is liable for 23% of the total damages, while John Wick is liable for 33% of the total damages. Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 in damages.
Calculate who must pay whom, and what would be the amount in damages?Based on the given information, the calculation for damages and who must pay whom is as follows:
Calculate the percentage of negligence for each driver:
Jane Doe is 23% negligent
John Wick is 33% negligent
Calculate the total amount of damages for each vehicle:
Range Rover: R175,000.00
Porsche Cayenne: pre-accident value of R985,000.00 (VAT) minus salvage value of R125,000.00, which equals R860,000.00 in damages
Calculate each driver's liability for damages:
Jane Doe is liable for 23% of the total damages, which is R201,500.00 [(R175,000.00 + R860,000.00) x 0.23]
John Wick is liable for 33% of the total damages, which is R277,450.00 [(R175,000.00 + R860,000.00) x 0.33]
Calculate the net amount that each driver must pay:
Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 [R277,450.00 - R201,500.00]
Therefore, John Wick will receive R75,950.00 from Jane Doe.
Thus, Jane Doe must pay John Wick R75,950.00 in damages.
To know more about VAT, visit
brainly.com/question/31341634
#SPJ1
The complete question is: Jane Doe purchased a Range Rover last week for R790 500 (VAT incl). While driving from the Dube Port area along the N2 Road in Durban, she collides with John Wick, who is the owner-driver of a Porshe Cayenne. Doe is 23% negligent, whereas Wick is 33% negligent. The damage to the Range Rover is estimated at R175 000.00. It is uneconomical to repair the Porsche, but its salvage value is R125 000.00. The pre-accident value of the Porsche was R985 000.00. With reference to the damages to Doe and Wick's motor vehicles, calculate who must pay whom, and what would be the amount in damages.
what dispute led to the new york times co. v. united states case in the supreme court? how was the case decided?
Explanation:
The New York Times Co. v. United States case, commonly known as the "Pentagon Papers case," was a legal dispute that arose in 1971 between the United States government and several major newspapers, including The New York Times, over the publication of classified documents related to the Vietnam War.
In 1967, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara commissioned a top-secret study on the U.S. government's decision-making process during the Vietnam War. The study, which became known as the "Pentagon Papers," consisted of a 7,000-page report that detailed the U.S. government's involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. In 1971, Daniel Ellsberg, a former government employee who had worked on the study, leaked portions of it to The New York Times and other newspapers.
The government argued that the publication of the classified documents would harm national security and requested that The New York Times and other newspapers cease publication of the materials. The newspapers argued that the First Amendment protected their right to publish the materials in the public interest.
The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the newspapers in a 6-3 decision. The Court held that the government had not met the heavy burden of proving that the publication of the materials would result in "direct, immediate, and irreparable" harm to national security. The Court further noted that the government's argument for prior restraint on the publication of the materials was unconstitutional, as it would amount to an impermissible abridgment of the freedom of the press.
The decision in the New York Times Co. v. United States case was a landmark victory for press freedom and the First Amendment, affirming the important role that the press plays in holding the government accountable to the public. The case set a precedent for future cases involving the publication of classified materials and established a high bar for the government to meet in order to justify prior restraint on the press.
In 1908, Theodore Roosevelt did not run for another term as president because
A. the constitution prevented him from doing so.
B. he had lost much of his public popularity.
C. in 1904 he had promised not to run again.
D. he was denied the nomination of his party.
In 1908, Theodore Roosevelt did not run for another term as president because he had promised not to run again in 1904. Therefore, the correct option is C. in 1904 he had promised not to run again.
In 1904, Roosevelt had won re-election as President. Before his second term, he announced he would not run for another term as President. Therefore, in 1908, Roosevelt kept his word and did not run for another term as President. He instead supported his Secretary of War, William Howard Taft, who was ultimately elected President.
To know more about President:
https://brainly.com/question/497462
#SPJ11
how long minimum amount of time you can have your probationary license?
Answer: 6 months
Explanation:
households (c)
government (g)
formation(I)
residual item
name the method used
Answer:
Expenditure approach to calculate GDP.
Explanation:
The terms represent the components of the expenditure approach used in calculating a country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
The expenditure approach sums up the total amount spent on goods and services produced within the country during a given period, typically a year.
The components of GDP using the expenditure approach are:
Consumption (C): the total spending by households on goods and services during the period.
Government spending (G): the total spending by the government on goods and services during the period.
Investment (I): the total spending on new capital equipment, buildings, and inventory by firms during the period.
Net Exports (NX): the difference between the value of exports and imports during the period.
The residual item in the expenditure approach is the difference between the total output (GDP) and the sum of the three components (C + G + I), which represents the net exports (NX).
So, the method used is the Expenditure approach to calculate GDP.