Due diligence pdf
You have the right to remain silent and cannot be punished for refusing to answer questions. If you wish to remain silent, tell the officer out loud. In some states, you must give your name if you are asked to identify yourself.
You are not required to give permission to be searched on your person or your belongings, but the police may search your clothing if they suspect you have a weapon. You should not physically resist, but you have the right to refuse permission for further searches. If you consent, this may harm you later in a court of law.
If a police or immigration agent asks to search the inside of your car, you may refuse permission. However, if the police believe your car contains evidence of a crime, they can search it without your permission.
Both drivers and passengers have the right to remain silent. If you are a passenger, you may ask if you are free to leave. If the officer says yes, remain seated quietly or leave calmly. Even if the officer says no, you have the right to remain silent.
Equal access to justice
Apud acta: Judicial proceedings that are recorded in a record attached to the procedure in question (a very frequent example will be the power of attorney by means of the appearance of the interested party before the court clerk).
Free Legal Aid: The right of persons lacking sufficient economic means to have the State assume the expenses derived from judicial proceedings (expenses of lawyers, attorneys and other professionals; costs of carrying out tests, etc.).
Attestation: Document issued by the judicial police and containing the finding of a fact, inquiries made and any other police proceedings aimed at the investigation of a criminal act.
Auto: Reasoned judicial resolution. Form to be adopted by the judicial resolution when deciding on appeals against orders, incidental questions, procedural budgets, nullity of proceedings, i.e., when no sentence is required.
Cassation: Extraordinary appeal filed before the Supreme Court against resolutions or sentences handed down in the Provincial Courts and, in certain cases, in the National Court.
Due diligence jurisprudence
In dealing with the registration of computer devices or equipment, the legislator has chosen to distinguish between a static registration, that of massive information storage devices, and a dynamic registration, the remote registration of computer equipment, which, although they have many common features, also offer unique aspects that invite their independent treatment. All the regulation that is now established, moreover, will always be presided over by the common provisions of general application to all the proceedings of technological investigation that are contained in Chapter IV of Title VIII of Book II LECrim that have been analyzed in Circular 1/2019.
Chapter VIII, Title VIII, Book II, LECrim, is dedicated to the registration of mass storage devices. It comprises three precepts (arts. 588 sexies a to 588 sexies c), along which all the regulation is condensed which, as occurs with the rest of the technological investigation diligences, is complemented by the Common Provisions included in Chapter IV of this same Title (arts. 588 bis a to 588 bis k).
Due diligence violence against women
that it has fueled. However, if we make the exercise of observing how the verb “to interpret” is used, we will realize that we all have a more or less clear idea of the activity carried out by the subject who performs the action. In fact, if it is a judge, he must compare the facts, presented and proven in the process, with the factual assumptions of the normative texts in order to apply the sanction.
the activities carried out by these two subjects. Judges and lawyers receive more or less the same university education, read the same books and rely on the same legal texts. In addition, to a greater or lesser extent, we all have access to the documents they draft. In short, the actions they take when we say they “interpret” are by no means hidden or mysterious, but, on the contrary, they are readily apparent in the documents they write.
That being the case, why do jurists continue to argue so heatedly about what it means to “interpret”? To proceed with our analysis, let us leave aside the lawyer’s activity and focus on