Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 10461 - 10470 of 24568 for extending.
Search results 10461 - 10470 of 24568 for extending.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
confinement and five years of extended supervision. This appeal follows
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=535177 - 2022-06-22
confinement and five years of extended supervision. This appeal follows
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=535177 - 2022-06-22
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of initial confinement followed by sixteen years of extended supervision. Following his conviction
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=728336 - 2023-11-21
of initial confinement followed by sixteen years of extended supervision. Following his conviction
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=728336 - 2023-11-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
plea of no contest. The court sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of extended
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=881494 - 2024-11-27
plea of no contest. The court sentenced him to life in prison without the possibility of extended
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=881494 - 2024-11-27
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
sentenced him to three years of initial confinement and four years of extended supervision. The first
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=907310 - 2025-02-04
sentenced him to three years of initial confinement and four years of extended supervision. The first
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=907310 - 2025-02-04
State v. Wesley H., Sr.
on “extended supervision” following his release from prison in May of 2002. Although there had been some
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6467 - 2005-03-31
on “extended supervision” following his release from prison in May of 2002. Although there had been some
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6467 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
confinement and ten years’ extended supervision out of a maximum possible forty years’ imprisonment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36015 - 2014-09-15
confinement and ten years’ extended supervision out of a maximum possible forty years’ imprisonment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36015 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
years’ initial confinement and ten years’ extended supervision. ¶3 Curtis moved for resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49246 - 2014-09-15
years’ initial confinement and ten years’ extended supervision. ¶3 Curtis moved for resentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49246 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and conclusion that because the commitment order expired and was not extended, the appeal is moot. 2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209221 - 2018-03-07
and conclusion that because the commitment order expired and was not extended, the appeal is moot. 2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209221 - 2018-03-07
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2 This court granted, for good cause, Jessica’s three successive motions to extend the time to file
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=566483 - 2022-09-15
2 This court granted, for good cause, Jessica’s three successive motions to extend the time to file
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=566483 - 2022-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and three years of extended supervision was unduly harsh and unconscionable. When imposing a sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213430 - 2018-05-30
and three years of extended supervision was unduly harsh and unconscionable. When imposing a sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=213430 - 2018-05-30