Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12971 - 12980 of 16507 for commentating.
Search results 12971 - 12980 of 16507 for commentating.
State v. Roy J. Jones
.” Finally, the trial court commented on the need to protect the public when it remarked that “clearly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13720 - 2005-03-31
.” Finally, the trial court commented on the need to protect the public when it remarked that “clearly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13720 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Daniel J. Lorge v. Randy Finger
in their questioning of Sheppard that Finger could have construed Sheppard’s comments as telling Finger he could
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21519 - 2017-09-21
in their questioning of Sheppard that Finger could have construed Sheppard’s comments as telling Finger he could
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21519 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Niko MaShell Triggs
The trial court commented that a fourth factor, although not very significant, was Rusfeldt’s denial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4947 - 2017-09-19
The trial court commented that a fourth factor, although not very significant, was Rusfeldt’s denial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4947 - 2017-09-19
State v. Michael J. Whipp
baby-sitter. Here, Whipp proposed calling adults to comment on his public conduct with children; Whipp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12537 - 2005-03-31
baby-sitter. Here, Whipp proposed calling adults to comment on his public conduct with children; Whipp
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12537 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Jay D. Harris
, trial counsel believed that Hubbard’s counsel was impermissibly commenting on Hubbard’s credibility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16062 - 2017-09-21
, trial counsel believed that Hubbard’s counsel was impermissibly commenting on Hubbard’s credibility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16062 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a year in the county jail. The State commented that the jail recommendation was puzzling because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=65189 - 2014-09-15
a year in the county jail. The State commented that the jail recommendation was puzzling because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=65189 - 2014-09-15
Kenneth Urman v. Brian Barron
158 (Ct. App. 1990). ¶27 Next, Barron argues that although the court “did not comment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4176 - 2005-03-31
158 (Ct. App. 1990). ¶27 Next, Barron argues that although the court “did not comment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4176 - 2005-03-31
Joyce A. Devenport v. Paper Recycling Company
from the Legislative Reference Bureau attorney who provided drafting services for the bill commented
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15330 - 2005-03-31
from the Legislative Reference Bureau attorney who provided drafting services for the bill commented
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15330 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
comments that the result in this case is due to a “perfect storm” of facts. So, bottom line, we should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=73058 - 2012-01-22
comments that the result in this case is due to a “perfect storm” of facts. So, bottom line, we should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=73058 - 2012-01-22
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
defenses which counsel does not offer.” Id. at 878. ¶27 However, in Kimbrough, we commented
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=106677 - 2017-09-21
defenses which counsel does not offer.” Id. at 878. ¶27 However, in Kimbrough, we commented
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=106677 - 2017-09-21