Which step in the decision-making process would help you in deciding how much money you want to make at work? a. Gather information
b. Define your wants and needs
C. Evaluate your choices
d. Analyze your resources
Please select the best answer from the choices provided
OA
B
C
OD

A. in weeks v. united states (1914), the court established the exclusionary rule, which was incorporated to the states in mapp v. ohio (1961), and the court established the concept of a "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule in united states v. leon (1984). in their opinion, the supreme court pointed out that compliance with the exclusionary rule can have a cost to society (criminals can go free) that outweighs the benefits (stopping illegal searches by police). ultimately, the court determined that despite the exclusionary rule, evidence can still be admitted in situations where police made genuine "good faith" efforts to act legally, but technically acted illegally, in obtaining the evidence. explain the exclusionary rule good faith exception and explain and support whether you agree or disagree with the concept of a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule? why or why not? use the lesson notes and/or one news source to support your answer.

Cooperation among oligopolies runs counter to the public interest because it leads to underproduction and high prices. in an effort to bring resource allocation closer to the social optimum, public officials attempt to force oligopolies to compete instead of cooperating. consider the following scenario: suppose that the presidents of two auto manufacturing companies exchange text messages in which they discuss jointly raising prices on their new lines of hybrid suvs. this illegal communication would violate which of the following laws? the sherman antitrust act of 1890 the robinson–patman act of 1936 the celler–kefauver act of 1950 the clayton act of 1914

Sara and her friends were at an iowa football game in iowa city. sara is a life long resident of iowa and goes to college at dmacc. while she was in iowa city, robert smashed into her car when he ran a red light. sara was seriously injured and taken to university hospitals in iowa city (fortunately her injuries were not life threatening but laid her up for a long time and she had to drop out of college for the rest of the semester). robert is from michigan and was in iowa city to see the game and then to party later. at the time of the accident robert was drunk (at least legally - he blew a 0.17 and the limit is 0.08). sara has sustained about $500,000 in damages between her current and future medical bills, pain/suffering, lost wages, etc. also her car was totaled in the accident. can sara sue robert in a federal court? explain why or why not. (be sure to mention the two primary factors associated with suing someone in a federal court in a case like this.)