How did the chinese communist party tret members of its organiztion differently from nonmembers

Morei would really appreciate it. his eyes snapped open. a musty smell flooded his senses. the room was lowly lit, curved with smooth light gray walls. the floor was clear black tiled. he stood up, surprised to see no door, but only a trap door on the ceiling that blended in with the walls. the room was unfurnished, which struck him as strange. as you write and revise, ask yourself these questions: 1. do all of the sentences in this paragraph belong here? (unity) 2. are all of the sentences in this paragraph in the right place? (coherence-- a method of development) 3. are all of the sentences in this paragraph smoothly connected together into a whole paragraph? (coherence--use of transitional devices) once you've made certain that your paragraphs are both unified and coherent, edit your work for problems in grammar and mechanics before submitting it to your teacher.

Awoman was found strangled in the basement of her home where she lived with her husband. the crime scene was processed and investigators left. the next day, the medical examiner reported that a scalloped, woven belt was used to strangle the victim. the police asked the husband to search the house again to look for such a belt and he agreed. a belt was found that matched marks on the victim. the man was arrested. his attorney made a motion that the belt be excluded from the evidence as he contended that the search was not legal. which statement is true? a. the belt should be excluded because the search was not legal. the police did not obtain a search warrant, as needed according to the fourth amendment to the u. s. constitution. b. the belt is admissible because the man gave his consent to the second search. c. the belt should be excluded because the search was not legal. the police did not obtain a search warrant, as need according to michigan v. tyler. d. the belt is admissible as evidence, according to mincey v. arizona.

Which of the following is not true about the supreme court?