Предмет: Русский язык, автор: Аноним

Образуйте от данных существительных в единственном числе сущест. вительные во множественном числе. Запишите. Обозначьте окончания 289 Читатель - писатель сугроб туман Мороз тетрадь лошадь степь - - строитель -

Ответы

Автор ответа: baxaibrahimov5

Ответ:

читатели,писатели,сугробы,туманы,морозы,тетради,лошади,степи, строители

Автор ответа: natalyailinceva

Ответ:

Читатели, писатели, сугробы, туманы, морозы, тетради, лошади, степи, строители

Объяснение:

Предыдущий вопрос

Следующий вопрос

Похожие вопросы

Предмет: Русский язык, автор: alyona00000

Составьте предложения с фразеологизмами (не добиться толку,сгорать от стыда, скользкий путь, получить широкую огласку,приобрести значение)
Пожайлуста очень срочно надо помогите!!!

1 год назад

Предмет: Русский язык, автор: Vlad1w

синтаксический разбор предложения :
В древний новый год начался не ёлкой а берёзой

1 год назад

Предмет: Русский язык, автор: яночка104

Раздели на слоги. Поставь ударение.Грибы. Ребята пошли в лес за грибами. Рома нашел под березой красивый подберезовик. Валя увидела под сосной маленький масленок. Сережа разглядел в траве огромный боровик. В роще они набрали полные корзины разных грибов. Ребята веселые и довольные вернулись домой.

1 год назад

Предмет: Алгебра, автор: helena20189

из двух сёл расстояние между которыми равно 7 км, одновременно начали движение пешеход и велосипедист. скорость пешехода равна 3,6 км/ч, а велосепедиста - 12 км/ч. через какое время после начала движения расстояние между ними будет 1,4 км. спасибо заранее!

7 лет назад

Предмет: Английский язык, автор: arfuio

Помогите перевести пожалуйста

Legal activity in the State and municipal authorities

Test
Assignment 1
Scan and translate the text
U.S. Supreme Court
Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 U.S. 523 (1967)
Camara v. Municipal Court of the City and County of San Francisco
No. 92
Argued February 15, 1967
Decided June 5, 1967
387 U.S. 523
Syllabus
Appellant was charged with violating the San Francisco Housing Code for refusing, after three efforts by city housing inspectors to secure his consent, to allow a warrantless inspection of the ground-floor quarters which he leased and residential use of which allegedly violated the apartment building's occupancy permit. Claiming the inspection ordinance unconstitutional for failure to require a warrant for inspections, appellant while awaiting trial, sued in a State Superior Court for a writ of prohibition, which the court denied. Relying on Frank v. Maryland and similar cases, the District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the ordinance did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The State Supreme Court denied a petition for hearing.
Held:
1. The Fourth Amendment bars prosecution of a person who has refused to permit a warrantless code enforcement inspection of his personal residence. Frank v. Maryland, supra, pro tanto overruled. Pp. 387 U. S. 528-534.
(a) The basic purpose of the Fourth Amendment, which is enforceable against the States through the Fourteenth, through its prohibition of "unreasonable" searches and seizures is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by governmental officials. P. 387 U. S. 528.
(b) With certain carefully defined exceptions, an unconsented warrantless search of private property is "unreasonable." Pp. 387 U. S. 528-529.
(c) Contrary to the assumption of Frank v. Maryland, supra, Fourth Amendment interests are not merely "peripheral" where municipal fire, health, and housing inspection programs are involved whose purpose is to determine the existence of physical conditions not complying with local ordinances. Those programs, moreover, are enforceable by criminal process, as is refusal to allow an inspection. Pp. 387 U. S. 529-531.
(d) Warrantless administrative searches cannot be justified on the grounds that they make minimal demands on occupants;
that warrant in such cases are unfeasible; or that area inspection programs could not function under reasonable search warrant requirements. Pp. 387 U. S. 531-533.
2. Probable cause upon the basis of which warrants are to be issued for area code enforcement inspections is not dependent on the inspector's belief that a particular dwelling violates the code, but on the reasonableness of the enforcement agency's appraisal of conditions in the area as a whole. The standards to guide the magistrate in the issuance of such search warrants will necessarily vary with the municipal program being enforced. Pp. 387 U. S. 534-539.
3. Search warrants which are required in nonemergency situations should normally be sought only after entry is refused. Pp. 387 U. S. 539-540.
4. In the nonemergency situation here, appellant had a right to insist that the inspectors obtain a search warrant. P. 387 U. S. 540,
Vacated and remanded.
Assignment 2
Copy out the key words from the text.
Assignment 3
Answer the following questions:
1. What does de novo mean in legal terms?
2. What are the essential elements of the rule of law?

7 лет назад