A woman was arrested outside of a house shortly after she had broken in and stolen some jewelry. She was indicted for larceny and later for burglary. She was tried on the larceny indictment and convicted. Thereafter, she was brought to trial on the burglary indictment. Relying on the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Constitution, the woman moves to dismiss the indictment. Should the motion be granted

Yes, the motion should be granted.

Explanation:

Double jeopardy prohibits different prosecutions for the same offense. The woman had already been tried and charged with larceny, which requires the same proof needed to prove burglary.

An example of this in law is if a man were convicted of joyriding, he cannot later be charged with auto theft because to prove joyriding, a prosecutor wouldn't have to prove anything more than what's required to prove auto theft. They are the same crime in these circumstances.

answer:

d

explanation:

answer:

b. tell a trusted adult

explanation:

most reasonable¯\_(ツ)_/¯(^.^)/~~~