For either Mapp v. Ohio or Miranda v. Arizona, describe the constitutional issue of the case, and explain how the court's ruling protects those accused of a crime.

Could you please explain the question better

Explanation:

What you said

For either Mapp v. Ohio or Miranda v. Arizona, describe the constitutional issue of the case, and explain how the court's ruling protects those accused of a crime.

one of the negative side effects were the economic losses the events of september 11th caused. many, many people lost their jobs as a result of a downturn in the economy after the terrorist attacks.

b) he seized power from the directory and appointed himself emperor

happy to

pls mark as brainliest