Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14271 - 14280 of 20379 for sai.
Search results 14271 - 14280 of 20379 for sai.
State v. James D. Paulson
. 1991). DISCUSSION ¶9 The gist of Paulson’s argument is that “[i]t is impossible to say what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3117 - 2005-03-31
. 1991). DISCUSSION ¶9 The gist of Paulson’s argument is that “[i]t is impossible to say what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3117 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
? [Defense Counsel]: Under the facts of this case and based on the testimony of the officer, the law says
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=113088 - 2017-09-21
? [Defense Counsel]: Under the facts of this case and based on the testimony of the officer, the law says
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=113088 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a formal motion, after which he says the trial court must make findings “as to whether the amendment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=665742 - 2023-06-13
a formal motion, after which he says the trial court must make findings “as to whether the amendment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=665742 - 2023-06-13
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, an asterisk, and a handwritten note saying “that’s him, ‘Yella.’” Rutherford’s interview report indicates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209372 - 2018-03-06
, an asterisk, and a handwritten note saying “that’s him, ‘Yella.’” Rutherford’s interview report indicates
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=209372 - 2018-03-06
[PDF]
Frontsheet
, if the stipulation should be amended to say so, and (2) the legal basis and rationale for dismissal of the pending
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=196632 - 2017-09-21
, if the stipulation should be amended to say so, and (2) the legal basis and rationale for dismissal of the pending
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=196632 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to admissible evidence. Rather, he says he should have been granted a hearing “to determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195367 - 2017-09-21
to admissible evidence. Rather, he says he should have been granted a hearing “to determine whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195367 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to counsel “saying that he [did] not wish to pursue the issue of going pro se.” Counsel indicated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=372353 - 2021-06-02
to counsel “saying that he [did] not wish to pursue the issue of going pro se.” Counsel indicated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=372353 - 2021-06-02
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael J. Backes
to F.M. after a telephone conversation the previous day, saying he would send F.M.'s file and a partial
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20018 - 2005-10-19
to F.M. after a telephone conversation the previous day, saying he would send F.M.'s file and a partial
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20018 - 2005-10-19
COURT OF APPEALS
, very apologetic,” though he did not recall Berlie saying precisely what had occurred. The Satoriuses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88802 - 2012-10-29
, very apologetic,” though he did not recall Berlie saying precisely what had occurred. The Satoriuses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88802 - 2012-10-29
COURT OF APPEALS
was not challenged. The trial court found that defense counsel’s affidavit of what the witnesses would say did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52963 - 2010-08-10
was not challenged. The trial court found that defense counsel’s affidavit of what the witnesses would say did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52963 - 2010-08-10