Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 11221 - 11230 of 68326 for did.
Search results 11221 - 11230 of 68326 for did.
[PDF]
State v. Charles W. Johnson
but not known to the trial court at the time of sentencing because it did not then exist or was unknowingly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14688 - 2017-09-21
but not known to the trial court at the time of sentencing because it did not then exist or was unknowingly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14688 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Adam C.
of a child. See §§ 940.225(2)(a) & 948.02(1), STATS. He claims that his trial lawyer did not give him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14940 - 2017-09-21
of a child. See §§ 940.225(2)(a) & 948.02(1), STATS. He claims that his trial lawyer did not give him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14940 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Kenneth Moffett
that Kimberly may have testified that the victim “did not appear as if she had been raped” after the assault
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5200 - 2017-09-19
that Kimberly may have testified that the victim “did not appear as if she had been raped” after the assault
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5200 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
was “[n]ot clear.” The court further remarked that David did “[n]ot [have] a particularly good handle
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1003658 - 2025-09-03
was “[n]ot clear.” The court further remarked that David did “[n]ot [have] a particularly good handle
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1003658 - 2025-09-03
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
was “[n]ot clear.” The court further remarked that David did “[n]ot [have] a particularly good handle
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1003658 - 2025-09-03
was “[n]ot clear.” The court further remarked that David did “[n]ot [have] a particularly good handle
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1003658 - 2025-09-03
[PDF]
Jon Firehammer v. Nancy Marchant
on the matter. This the court granted. However, the court did not change its position on the intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13685 - 2014-09-15
on the matter. This the court granted. However, the court did not change its position on the intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13685 - 2014-09-15
Michael Kidd v. Sue Diblasio
and the defendants' attorneys on the record by using a speaker phone. The Kidds did not call
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8106 - 2005-03-31
and the defendants' attorneys on the record by using a speaker phone. The Kidds did not call
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8106 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
) the court did not follow mandatory procedures regarding Maus’s waiver of counsel; (3) the court erroneously
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112186 - 2014-05-12
) the court did not follow mandatory procedures regarding Maus’s waiver of counsel; (3) the court erroneously
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112186 - 2014-05-12
State v. William Gunderson
by telephone. His attorney appeared in person.[2] At no time did Gunderson object to appearing by telephone
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4983 - 2005-03-31
by telephone. His attorney appeared in person.[2] At no time did Gunderson object to appearing by telephone
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4983 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Michael Kidd v. Sue Diblasio
and the defendants' attorneys on the record by using a speaker phone. The Kidds did not call back, and at 2:55
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8106 - 2017-09-19
and the defendants' attorneys on the record by using a speaker phone. The Kidds did not call back, and at 2:55
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8106 - 2017-09-19