Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 11361 - 11370 of 58729 for WA 0812 2782 5310 Perusahaan Kontraktor Slow Motion Fountain Mataram Nusa Tenggara Barat.
Search results 11361 - 11370 of 58729 for WA 0812 2782 5310 Perusahaan Kontraktor Slow Motion Fountain Mataram Nusa Tenggara Barat.
[PDF]
State v. Elaine Veasley
in denying her motion to suppress evidence that was discovered during an illegal search. She contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8636 - 2017-09-19
in denying her motion to suppress evidence that was discovered during an illegal search. She contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8636 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Peter J. Bartram
to suppress evidence from that search. The motion was accompanied by an affidavit by Bartram’s counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15864 - 2017-09-21
to suppress evidence from that search. The motion was accompanied by an affidavit by Bartram’s counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15864 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
On December 10, 2015, the City filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that: (1) the City is immune from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172698 - 2017-09-21
On December 10, 2015, the City filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that: (1) the City is immune from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=172698 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and an order denying his postconviction motion. He contends that the No. 2017AP375-CR 2 circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209835 - 2018-03-21
and an order denying his postconviction motion. He contends that the No. 2017AP375-CR 2 circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209835 - 2018-03-21
COURT OF APPEALS
and from two postconviction orders denying his sentence modification motions.[1] The issue is whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52522 - 2010-07-26
and from two postconviction orders denying his sentence modification motions.[1] The issue is whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52522 - 2010-07-26
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Page’s pro se motion to suppress based on what he contended were inadequate search warrant affidavits
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1160726 - 2026-08-18
Page’s pro se motion to suppress based on what he contended were inadequate search warrant affidavits
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1160726 - 2026-08-18
CA Blank Order
moved to withdraw. The circuit court set a hearing on the motion for August 1, 2012, but had to reset
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=128263 - 2014-11-10
moved to withdraw. The circuit court set a hearing on the motion for August 1, 2012, but had to reset
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=128263 - 2014-11-10
COURT OF APPEALS
postdisposition motion. Paris argues the evidence presented at his motion hearing was insufficient to prove his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36405 - 2009-05-04
postdisposition motion. Paris argues the evidence presented at his motion hearing was insufficient to prove his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36405 - 2009-05-04
[PDF]
Oral Argument Synopses - March 2021
was subsequently arrested and charged. Genous filed a motion to suppress the evidence from the traffic stop
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=346859 - 2021-03-15
was subsequently arrested and charged. Genous filed a motion to suppress the evidence from the traffic stop
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=346859 - 2021-03-15
[PDF]
Oral Argument Synopses - October 2022
Barnes’ motion to exclude the officer’s testimony because the State committed an “egregious” discovery
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=573579 - 2022-09-29
Barnes’ motion to exclude the officer’s testimony because the State committed an “egregious” discovery
/sc/orasyn/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=573579 - 2022-09-29