What observations can you make about this group of cople? Name one inference you can make from your obser

Which best describes california population when it became a state in 1850? a. because of the gold rush attracting settlers all over the world california population diverse. bcalifornia had banned foreign immigrants at the start of the gold rush. so, the states population was made up of entirely of americans from other parts of the country. c california had a large african population because many southern planters had moved their enslaved africans to start large farms. d the indian removal act had led to the relocation of thousands of eastern native americans to california. as, a result the majority of californias population was native american

One eoc function is to provide coordinated support to incident command. true or false

Athief was passing by a house under construction when he noticed that the ladder being used by workers on the roof had copper braces supporting the rungs. after making sure that the workers on the roof could not see him, the thief used pliers that he had in his pocket to remove all of the copper braces that he could reach from the ground. a short time later, a worker climbed down the ladder and it collapsed. he fell to the ground and severely injured his back. the thief was apprehended a few hours later trying to sell the copper for scrap. a statute in the jurisdiction makes it a felony for "maliciously causing serious physical injury to another." the thief was charged with malicious injury under the statute and was also charged with larceny. after a jury trial in which the above facts were presented, he was convicted of both charges. if he appeals the conviction for the malicious injury charge on grounds of insufficient evidence, how should the court rule? a affirm the conviction, because the thief was engaged in criminal conduct at the time of the act that resulted in the injury. b affirm the conviction, because the jury could have found that the thief acted with malice. c reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief intended to injure anyone. d reverse the conviction, because there was no evidence that the thief bore any malice towards the workers on the roof.