Question

after frank palko was sentenced to death by the state of connecticut, the supreme court ruled that
his conviction and execution should be upheld.
the case should be thrown out for lack of evidence.
his sentence should be reduced.
he was the victim of double jeopardy.

Explanation:

In the Palko v. Connecticut case, the Supreme Court ruled that Palko's conviction and execution should be upheld. The Court held that the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment (at that time not fully incorporated to the states via the Fourteenth Amendment) did not bar Connecticut from retrying him, and his conviction was upheld. The other options are incorrect: there was evidence, the sentence wasn't reduced, and the Court didn't find double jeopardy applied here.

Answer:

A. his conviction and execution should be upheld.