_________ torts occur when the defendant takes an action intending or knowing certain consequences will result, like throwing a punch at someone.

The landowner is likely to comply with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by agreeing to a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) before beginning the development of a subdivision.

The Endangered Species Act is a federal law in the United States that aims to protect endangered and threatened species and their habitats. Under the ESA, it is illegal to harm, harass, or kill any endangered or threatened species or to destroy or modify their habitats. The law applies to both public and private lands.

To comply with the ESA, landowners may enter into an HCP with the government, which outlines the steps the landowner will take to minimize or mitigate the impact of their development on endangered or threatened species and their habitats. In exchange, the government may issue a permit allowing the landowner to proceed with their development.

HCPs are typically developed in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service, which are responsible for enforcing the ESA. By entering into an HCP, the landowner can ensure compliance with the ESA while still being able to develop their land.

To learn more about Endangered Species Act, visit here

https://brainly.com/question/10415903

#SPJ4

It depends on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances of the case. In some jurisdictions, a defendant's request for a continuance may toll or pause the time limits for a speedy trial, while in others it may not. Additionally, the length of the continuance and the reasons for the request may also be factors that are taken into consideration when determining whether the speedy trial clock is still running. It's important to consult the specific laws and rules of the jurisdiction in question to determine how a request for a continuance may impact the speedy trial timeline.

The statement is false. A continuance refers to a postponement or delay in the trial proceedings.

When a defendant requests a three-week continuance, the time limits required for a speedy trial are indeed affected.

The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees a defendant the right to a speedy trial. The time limits for a speedy trial vary from state to state, but typically range from 60 to 90 days.

If a defendant requests a continuance, the time clock for a speedy trial is paused during the period of delay. Thus, the total time for a speedy trial may be extended to accommodate the defendant's request for a continuance.

To know more about trial proceedings refer here: https://brainly.com/question/7643591#

#SPJ11

The U.S. Supreme Court authorized a search of a motor home with probable cause, but no warrant, in California v Carney (1985) due to the mobility of the vehicle and the reduced expectation of privacy in such vehicles.

In California v Carney (1985), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a warrantless search of a motor home was permissible under the Fourth Amendment's search and seizure clause.

The court determined that the motor home was highly mobile and readily capable of leaving the jurisdiction, and the reduced expectation of privacy in such vehicles justified the warrantless search. The court further stated that the reasonable expectation of privacy of individuals in motor homes is less than in a fixed dwelling.

The decision provided law enforcement officials with more latitude in conducting warrantless searches of vehicles, particularly those that are highly mobile.

To know more about U.S. Supreme Court, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/224703#
#SPJ11

The type of tort you are referring to is known as an "ultra-hazardous activity tort."

This is a complex area of law, and providing a detailed answer would require delving into the various legal nuances and interpretations of this particular tort. However, in short, an ultra-hazardous activity tort occurs when the defendant engages in an activity that is so inherently dangerous that no amount of care or precaution can make it safe.

This is different from other types of torts, such as negligence, where the defendant's actions are judged based on a standard of reasonable care. Because ultra-hazardous activities are so inherently dangerous, the law generally holds defendants strictly liable for any harm that results from their actions.

This means that the plaintiff does not need to prove that the defendant was negligent, only that the harm was a result of the ultra-hazardous activity. Overall, the long answer to your question is that an ultra-hazardous activity tort is a specific type of tort that arises when the defendant engages in an inherently dangerous activity that cannot be made safe, and the law holds them strictly liable for any resulting harm.

Learn more about torts

https://brainly.com/question/14965931

#SPJ11

In contract law, the damages that Mr. Knievel may recover are determined by the concept of "expectation damages."

Expectation damages aim to put the injured party in the position they would have been in if the contract had been performed as agreed. In this case, Mr. Knievel expected his leg to be fixed like it was never broken, as promised by Dr. Van Helsing. To measure the damages, one would calculate the difference between Mr. Knievel's current situation (with a leg 2" shorter than the other) and the situation he would have been in had the surgery been successful (with a leg that was fixed like it was never broken).

Factors to consider when calculating damages may include:

1. Additional medical costs: Mr. Knievel might need further treatments or surgeries to address the issue caused by Dr. Van Helsing's procedure.
2. Lost wages: If Mr. Knievel's injury resulted in an inability to work or reduced working capacity, he may be entitled to recover lost wages.
3. Pain and suffering: The court might also take into account any pain and suffering Mr. Knievel experienced due to the unsuccessful procedure.

It's essential to note that this answer is based on contract law principles and not negligence or medical malpractice, which could have different methods for calculating damages.

To know more about  contract law visit:

brainly.com/question/29484475

#SPJ11

In criminal law, when a defendant enters a plea of guilty, the judge must determine whether the plea is knowingly entered and completely voluntary.

This requirement stems from the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, which guarantees defendants the right to a fair and impartial trial. In order for a guilty plea to be valid, the defendant must have a full understanding of the charges against them, the consequences of their plea, and the rights they are waiving by pleading guilty. Additionally, the plea must not be the result of coercion or undue influence, such as promises of leniency or threats of harm.

The judge may conduct a colloquy with the defendant, which is a series of questions aimed at ensuring that the defendant is making a voluntary and informed decision to plead guilty. If the judge determines that the plea is not knowingly entered or completely voluntary, the plea may be withdrawn and the case may proceed to trial. Overall, the requirement that a guilty plea be knowingly entered and completely voluntary is an important safeguard in the criminal justice system, as it helps to ensure that defendants are not unfairly pressured into giving up their rights.

Learn more about law :

https://brainly.com/question/29553358

#SPJ11

In this case, Digong's contention is not entirely correct. He committed the crime of attempted theft.

The crime committed by Digong in this case is known as attempted theft  and not frustrated theft because an attempted theft occurs when the offender commences the execution of the crime by overt acts but fails to complete it by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.

In this case, he took cartons of sardines can goods from the supermarket which is an overt act of theft but was immediately apprehended by the security guard which prevented him from completing the crime. This makes his offense an attempted theft as he had the intent to steal but was not able to complete the crime.

Read more about sales contract

brainly.com/question/28326714

#SPJ1

The term for one who commits a tort is a tortfeasor.

A tortfeasor is a person or entity that is responsible for committing a tort, which is a civil wrong that results in harm to another person or their property. Examples of torts include negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and trespassing.

The term "tortfeasor" comes from the Latin words "tortus," which means twisted, and "facere," which means to do or to make. In other words, a tortfeasor is someone who has twisted or distorted the rights of another person through their actions.

When a tort is committed, the injured party can seek damages or compensation from the tortfeasor through a civil lawsuit. The amount of damages awarded depends on the severity of the harm caused, the intent of the tortfeasor, and other factors.

In some cases, the tortfeasor may also face criminal charges if their actions were particularly egregious, such as in cases of assault or battery.

To know more about committing a tort, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/2669139#
#SPJ11

An ex post facto law is a law that criminalizes an act that occurred before the law was enacted. This type of law is generally considered unjust and is prohibited by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9 for federal laws, and in Article 1, Section 10 for state laws.

An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of an action, making it illegal or subject to a greater punishment than it was at the time it was committed. The term "ex post facto" comes from Latin and means "from a thing done afterward".Such laws are generally considered unconstitutional because they violate the principle of fair notice and the right to due process. The U.S. Constitution explicitly prohibits the enactment of ex post facto laws in Article I, Section 9. This means that the government cannot pass a law that retroactively criminalizes conduct, increases the punishment for a crime after it has been committed, or deprives a person of a defense that was available at the time the crime was committed.

Learn more about the Constitution here:

https://brainly.com/question/29799909

#SPJ11

A contract for a purpose that causes the parties to violate a law is considered illegal and void. This means that the contract is not legally binding and cannot be enforced by either party.

It is important to note that the illegality of the contract must be related to the purpose of the contract, rather than incidental or minor violations of the law. For example, a contract to sell illegal drugs would be illegal and void, but a contract to sell a car where one party happened to be driving without a license would likely still be enforceable. It is not possible for the contract to be enforceable as a quasi-contract, as quasi-contracts arise when there is no actual contract in place but one party has received unjust enrichment at the expense of the other. In the case of an illegal contract, there is no valid contract, to begin with.

The contract is also not simply voidable, which would mean that one party has the option to void or cancel the contract at their discretion. Instead, the contract is considered illegal and void, meaning that it is null and void from the outset and cannot be ratified or enforced.

Finally, the contract is not dischargeable, as discharge typically refers to the release of a party from their obligations under a contract. In the case of an illegal contract, there are no valid obligations, to begin with, so discharge is not applicable.

In summary, a contract for a purpose that causes the parties to violate a law is illegal and void, which means it is not enforceable and has no legal effect. This is a detailed answer to your question that provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal implications of an illegal contract.

Learn more about quasi-contract

https://brainly.com/question/29651556

#SPJ11

A contract that causes the parties to violate a law is illegal and void. Such a contract opposes public policy and societal interests. Additionally, if any contract limits competition and encourages illegal activities, it also falls under such a category.

A contract for a purpose that causes the parties to violate a law is illegal and void. Such a contract is not enforceable, as it opposes public policy and societal interests. Generally, a legal system must enforce contracts to ensure economic transactions and growth. However, if a contract encourages illegal activities, this opposes the purpose of law and justice, therefore, it falls into the category of an unlawful contract.

Consider this example for a clearer understanding: If a large retailer obtained the exclusive rights to be the only distributor of televisions, computers, and audio equipment made by various companies, then, this exclusive contract despite potentially being legal, may limit competition and hence, it would have an anticompetitive effect and could be ruled as unlawful.

https://brainly.com/question/33763152

#SPJ6

The law making it illegal to burn Bibles, but not other books, in public parks, is not consistent with the guarantees in the First Amendment because it violates the principle of free speech and expression.

The First Amendment protects the right of individuals to express their beliefs and ideas without censorship or government interference. The law that specifically targets the burning of Bibles is discriminatory and selective, and it sends a message that certain religious beliefs are favoured over others.

This is a clear violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from promoting or endorsing any religion. Moreover, the law creates a chilling effect on free speech by discouraging individuals from expressing their opinions in a public setting. In conclusion, the law is unconstitutional and should be struck down as it violates the core principles of the First Amendment.

To know more about the Principle of Free Speech visit:

https://brainly.com/question/10737690

#SPJ11

The answer to the question is that the approach that proposes additional rights, such as the right to clean air and clean water, is the substantive due process approach.

This approach holds that certain fundamental rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be taken away by the government without a compelling reason. The explanation for this approach is that it recognizes that due process is not only about the procedures used in court, but also about the substance of the laws themselves. Therefore, litigants in state courts have a right to clean air and clean water as part of their due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Substantive Due Process involves the interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment to include rights not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. This approach considers certain fundamental rights, such as the right to clean air and clean water, as essential for individuals and therefore protected by the Due Process Clause.

Learn more about substantive due process approach: https://brainly.com/question/12176865

#SPJ11

Answer:

Explanation:

The Scottsboro case was a landmark legal case in the United States that began in 1931 and continued for over a decade. The case centred around nine black teenagers who were accused of raping two white women on a train in Alabama. The case became a symbol of racial injustice in the United States and raised important questions about the role of race in the criminal justice system.

At the core of the Scottsboro case was the issue of racial discrimination. The defendants were charged and convicted in a highly charged atmosphere of racial hatred and bigotry, and they received little in the way of a fair trial. The Scottsboro defendants were initially sentenced to death, and although the U.S. Supreme Court overturned their convictions twice, they were eventually found guilty again and sentenced to long prison terms.

The consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the Scottsboro case were significant. The Court's decisions highlighted the need for greater protection of defendants' rights in criminal trials, especially in cases where racial bias may be present. The Scottsboro case led to important legal precedents that helped to establish a defendant's right to a fair trial and the right to an impartial jury.

The Scottsboro case also helped to raise awareness about the issue of racial discrimination and segregation in the United States. The case became a rallying cry for the civil rights movement, and it helped to galvanize support for the movement's efforts to end segregation and secure equal rights for all Americans.

Overall, the Scottsboro case was a pivotal moment in the struggle for civil rights in the United States. It brought issues of racial discrimination to the forefront of public consciousness and helped to shape the legal and social landscape of the country. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of upholding the principles of justice and equality in all aspects of society.

PLS MARK ME BRAINLIEST

Trial courts in the federal system are called U.S. District Courts. These courts are responsible for hearing cases that involve federal law or disputes between parties from different states.

The U.S. District Courts are the lowest level of federal courts, and they are located in different regions throughout the United States. When a decision from a U.S. District Court is appealed, it is sent to the U.S. Courts of Appeals, which are the intermediate level of the federal court system. The U.S. Supreme Court is the highest level of the federal court system and is responsible for hearing appeals from the U.S. Courts of Appeals and making final decisions on important legal issues.

Learn more about federal courts here:

https://brainly.com/question/16314718

#SPJ11

The role the U.S. Constitution play in creating local governments is It gives the states the authority to create any local governments they need. Option B

The ability to establish local governments is delegated to each states by the United States Constitution. This means that each state has the ability to form and structure its own local governments in accordance with its state constitution and any applicable legislation.

The United States Constitution does not specify the structure or sorts of municipal governments that states may establish. Instead, it reserves all powers not expressly given to the federal government by the Constitution to the states.

Learn more about US constitution at https://brainly.com/question/27954283

#SPJ1

The clause in the Constitution that mandates that each state respects and enforces licenses and legal actions of other states is the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause is found in Article IV, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution. It requires that each state give full faith and credit to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. This means that a legal action taken in one state, such as a court ruling or a marriage license, must be recognized as valid and enforceable in all other states.

The Full Faith and Credit Clause ensures that citizens are not able to evade legal obligations simply by moving to another state. It also prevents states from discriminating against out-of-state residents by denying them rights or benefits that are available to in-state residents.

However, there are some exceptions to the Full Faith and Credit Clause. For example, a state can refuse to recognize a judgment from another state if it violates the public policy of the second state, such as a judgment allowing underage marriage or polygamy.

To know more about Full Faith and Credit Clause, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/1345801#
#SPJ11

The term you are referring to is commonly known as plea bargaining.

A detailed answer to this question would explain that plea bargaining is a negotiation process between a defendant and the prosecution, in which the defendant agrees to plead guilty to a criminal charge in exchange for a reduction in charges, a lighter sentence, or some other benefit from the state.

This process can save time and resources for both parties, as it avoids the need for a full trial. However, it has also been criticized for leading to unfair outcomes and contributing to a "guilty until proven innocent" mentality in the justice system. A long answer would delve further into the history and controversies surrounding plea bargaining, and discuss some of the arguments for and against its use in criminal cases.

The process through which a defendant pleads guilty to a criminal charge with the expectation of receiving some benefit from the state can best be defined as "plea bargaining." In plea bargaining, the defendant agrees to plead guilty in exchange for a more lenient sentence or a reduction in charges. This process typically involves negotiation between the prosecution and defense to reach a mutually acceptable agreement.

Learn more about Plea Bargaining

https://brainly.com/question/27804501

#SPJ11

The type of court that has been designed to focus on treatment options instead of punishment for drug convictions is a drug court.

Drug courts are specialized courts that aim to address the root cause of drug-related criminal activity, which is often substance abuse or addiction. Instead of sending defendants to jail, drug courts offer a range of treatment options, including substance abuse counseling, therapy, and rehabilitation programs.

Participants in drug courts are required to attend regular court appearances, undergo regular drug testing, and comply with the court's treatment plan. Successful completion of the program can result in reduced charges or even dismissal of charges.

Drug courts have been implemented in various jurisdictions across the United States as a way to reduce recidivism rates among drug offenders and promote long-term recovery.

To know more about drug court., refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/31677573#
#SPJ11

The doctrine that applies when a defendant violates an existing statute intended to prevent injury to persons of a class which includes the plaintiff is negligence per se.

This legal principle assumes that the defendant has acted negligently, and as a result, the plaintiff has been harmed. Negligence per se simplifies the process of establishing negligence by eliminating the need to prove that the defendant breached a duty of care owed to the plaintiff.
To establish negligence per se, the plaintiff must show that: (1) the defendant violated a statute; (2) the statute was designed to prevent the type of injury that occurred; (3) the plaintiff is a member of the class of persons the statute was designed to protect; and (4) the violation of the statute was the cause of the plaintiff's injury.
In summary, negligence per se is a doctrine that enables plaintiffs to recover damages when a defendant's violation of a statute results in injury to a person of a class that includes the plaintiff. It is a powerful tool in personal injury litigation that simplifies the process of proving negligence and facilitates the recovery of damages for injured parties.

Learn more about plaintiff :

https://brainly.com/question/29213966

#SPJ11

A detailed answer to your question is that while Nashville, Tennessee may pass an ordinance to regulate waste disposal within its city limits, waste disposal may also be regulated by other entities.

For example, the state of Tennessee may have its own regulations regarding waste disposal, as well as federal regulations set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Additionally, certain types of waste, such as hazardous waste, may be subject to specialized regulations and requirements.

To provide a long answer, waste disposal is a complex issue that involves various factors, including public health, environmental protection, and economic considerations. Waste can take many forms, such as solid waste, hazardous waste, medical waste, and electronic waste, and each type of waste may require specific methods of disposal to prevent harm to people and the environment.

To regulate waste disposal, local governments may establish ordinances that set rules for how waste should be collected, transported, and disposed of within their jurisdiction. For example, Nashville's waste disposal ordinance may require residents and businesses to use certain types of waste containers or to separate recyclable materials from non-recyclable waste.

However, these local regulations are often supplemented by state and federal regulations that set minimum standards for waste disposal. For instance, the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation oversees the state's solid waste program, which includes regulations for landfill operations, waste reduction, and recycling. Meanwhile, the EPA regulates hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which establishes rules for how hazardous waste must be handled, transported, and disposed of.

In summary, waste disposal can be regulated by multiple entities, and regulations can vary depending on the type of waste and the location where it is generated. A comprehensive understanding of waste disposal regulations requires an explanation of the different types of waste and the regulatory agencies involved, as well as an in-depth analysis of specific regulations that apply to a particular situation.

Learn more about waste disposal

https://brainly.com/question/2724332

#SPJ11

Partial performance is an exception to the statute of frauds in which the performance of portions of an unwritten agreement by one or both parties.

The statute of frauds requires certain contracts, such as contracts for the sale of land or contracts that cannot be performed within one year, to be in writing in order to be enforceable. However, if one party performs a part of the unwritten agreement, such as paying a deposit or starting work on a project, it may be evidence that there was a verbal agreement between the parties.
This exception to the statute of frauds is based on the idea that it would be unfair to allow a party to use the statute of frauds as a shield to avoid their obligations under an oral contract after having received the benefits of partial performance. However, partial performance must be unequivocally referable to the alleged contract, and the party seeking to enforce the contract must prove that there was an agreement and that it was breached by the other party.
In summary, partial performance is an important exception to the statute of frauds that allows for oral contracts to be enforced if there is evidence of partial performance by one or both parties. However, the requirements for invoking this exception can be difficult to meet and require a thorough understanding of contract law.

Learn more about law :

https://brainly.com/question/29553358

#SPJ11

Convicted criminals whose sentences increase during their prison term due to a change in the law have been illegally subjected to ex post facto law.

Ex post facto is a Latin term that means "after the fact." In law, it refers to a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences of actions that were committed before the enactment of the law.

The U.S. Constitution specifically prohibits the enactment of ex post facto laws. This means that the government cannot punish someone for an action that was not a crime when they committed it, or increase the punishment for an action that was a crime when they committed it.

Therefore, if a criminal's sentence is increased during their prison term due to a change in the law, it would be a violation of the ex post facto clause of the Constitution.

To know more about Convicted criminals, refer here:
https://brainly.com/question/19990011#
#SPJ11

Courts seldom consider the issue of substantive fairness in contract disputes, meaning that they usually do not determine whether a contracting party made a good bargain.

Rather, the courts generally focus on the objective elements of a contract such as the terms, conditions, and intentions of the parties. They do not get into the subjective considerations of whether the parties were on equal footing in negotiating the contract or whether one party took advantage of the other.
The doctrine of freedom of contract is deeply ingrained in common law jurisdictions, which means that individuals are generally free to enter into contracts on any terms they see fit as long as they do not contravene public policy or are otherwise illegal. As such, courts tend to view contracts as a matter of voluntary agreement between parties, and they do not intervene to scrutinize the fairness of the deal that was struck.
There are, of course, exceptions to this general rule. For example, in cases where one party has a significant bargaining power advantage over the other, or where there is fraud, duress, or undue influence, a court may declare a contract to be unconscionable and set it aside. Nonetheless, as a general principle, the courts tend to defer to the autonomy of the parties in contractual relations, and they do not concern themselves with whether one party made a "good" or "bad" deal.

Learn more about Courts :

https://brainly.com/question/13375489

#SPJ11

A question that a judge must ask to determine whether a proceeding or document is presumptively open is whether there is a strong presumption in favour of public access to that particular type of proceeding or document.

In other words, the judge must determine whether there is a legal presumption that the proceeding or document should be open to the public unless there is a compelling reason to close it. This presumption is based on the First Amendment's guarantee of a free press and the public's right to know about the workings of the government.

The judge must also consider any applicable laws or rules that may provide guidance on whether the proceeding or document is presumptively open or closed. Ultimately, the judge must balance the public's interest in access against any countervailing interests, such as privacy concerns or national security considerations, in order to make a determination on whether the proceeding or document should be open or closed.

To know more about Proceedings visit:

https://brainly.com/question/15122322

#SPJ11

The rule in tort law that you are referring to is known as comparative negligence.

This legal principle is widely used in the majority of states and aims to allocate responsibility between the plaintiff and defendant in a lawsuit. Comparative negligence operates by reducing the amount of damages that a plaintiff can recover in proportion to their own degree of fault in causing their injuries.
In other words, if a plaintiff is found to be partially responsible for their own injuries, their damages award will be reduced by the percentage of fault assigned to them. For example, if a plaintiff is found to be 25% at fault for an accident that caused them $100,000 in damages, they would only be able to recover $75,000 (i.e. $100,000 minus 25%).
Comparative negligence is designed to promote fairness and accuracy in tort law by holding each party responsible for their contribution to the harm suffered. It allows for a more nuanced approach to determining liability, rather than an all-or-nothing approach that would completely bar recovery for plaintiffs who are partially at fault.

Learn more about plaintiff :

https://brainly.com/question/29213966

#SPJ11

A. Lobbyists provide a platform for small groups to become part of U.S. politics, yet their sway may cause legislators to back policies that do not offer collective gain.

Option A accurately characterizes both the upside and downside of lobbyists on participatory democracy. On one hand, they can give smaller factions representation in legislative matters, allowing them to express concerns and participate in governmental deliberations.

Nevertheless, the detrimental consequence is that lobbyists may endeavor to push measures that are contrary to more universal interests, yet benefit those actors and organizations they address or serve.

Learn more about democratic process at

https://brainly.com/question/29798216

#SPJ1

Answer:

Explanation:

The fixed duration of reclusion perpetua is 40 years, and it retains the nature of periods regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. Reclusion perpetua is a penalty of imprisonment for a period of 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.

Raul committed the crimes of murder and illegal possession of firearms. Murder is the unlawful killing of a person with malice aforethought, and the penalty for murder is reclusion perpetua to death. Illegal possession of firearms is a crime that carries a penalty of imprisonment ranging from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years.

The penalty for unlicensed firearms possession can be used as either a mitigating or aggravating circumstance, depending on the circumstances of the case. Mitigating circumstances can lower the penalty for a crime while aggravating circumstances can increase the penalty.

Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) can be used as a defence in cases of domestic violence where the defendant acted in self-defence. However, in Marivic Catapang's case, the court found that the defence of BWS was not applicable because the accused did not exhibit the characteristic cycle of violence that defines BWS.

To qualify for the defence of BWS, the accused must show that they have been subjected to a pattern of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse from their partner, resulting in learned helplessness and the belief that they cannot escape the abuse. If the accused does not meet the requirements for BWS, they cannot be exempted from criminal liability.

PLS MARK ME BRAINLIEST