After Frank Palko was sentenced to death by the state of Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that

his conviction and execution should be upheld.

the case should be thrown out for lack of evidence.

his sentence should be reduced.

he was the victim of double jeopardy.

Question

Guest

Chemistry

25 May, 02:19

After Frank Palko was sentenced to death by the state of Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that

his conviction and execution should be upheld.

the case should be thrown out for lack of evidence.

his sentence should be reduced.

he was the victim of double jeopardy.

+3

Answers (2)

Know the Answer?

Valerie Aguilar · Answer 1

The answer is A. "his conviction and execution should be upheld."

Clarence Wolf · Answer 2

The answer is "his conviction and execution should be upheld". Frank Palko was first charged with murder and claimed that Connecticut violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The fifth amendment states that "there must be no person to be put twice in jeopardy of life and limb" so this was the violation the court made after they charge him with murder for the second time. That's why when the second trial was made, he was sentenced to by the Supreme court which decided that he should be executed and convicted because of the evidences found.

After Frank Palko was sentenced to death by the state of Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled thathis conviction and execution should be upheld.the case should be thrown out for lack of evidence.his sentence should be reduced.he was the victim of double jeopardy.

After Frank Palko was sentenced to death by the state of Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that

his conviction and execution should be upheld.

the case should be thrown out for lack of evidence.

his sentence should be reduced.

he was the victim of double jeopardy.