Somebody pls do this?

Is even more difficult to analyze because of the lack of cues in computer mediated communication.

Awife was having an affair with her neighbor. the wife and her husband had a prenuptial agreement that prevented the wife from receiving any of the husband’s sizable fortune in the event of a divorce. the wife and her neighbor formed a plan to murder the husband and run away together with the wife’s inheritance. the neighbor shot the husband one evening, killing him instantly, then drove to a town 100 miles away and checked into a motel. later that night, the police showed up at the motel with a valid warrant for the neighbor’s arrest. after the neighbor was arrested and placed in a police car, the police asked the motel clerk for permission to search the room, and the clerk granted the request. the police found the gun hidden in the tank of the toilet. the wife and the neighbor were each charged with first-degree murder and tried separately. at her trial, the wife sought to suppress any evidence of the gun, arguing that it was seized illegally. what is the prosecution’s strongest response to this argument? athe motel clerk gave the police permission to search the room. bthe wife was not staying in the motel room where the gun was found. cthe gun was found in a search incident to a lawful arrest. dthe neighbor did not have a reason

What was included in most state constitutions that guaranteed protection of individual liberties based upon common law?