Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 14681 - 14690 of 63547 for records/1000.
Search results 14681 - 14690 of 63547 for records/1000.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of secondary factors including the defendant’s past record of criminal offenses; history of undesirable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=64983 - 2014-09-15
of secondary factors including the defendant’s past record of criminal offenses; history of undesirable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=64983 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report and response, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=132842 - 2017-09-21
a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report and response, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=132842 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, was advised of his right to file a response, but did not do so. We have independently reviewed the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=746326 - 2024-01-03
, was advised of his right to file a response, but did not do so. We have independently reviewed the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=746326 - 2024-01-03
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
our independent review of the records as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207120 - 2018-01-17
our independent review of the records as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207120 - 2018-01-17
Cynthia J. Hinojosa v. Joe R. Hinojosa
and the record, we affirm the judgment appealed in case No. 96-2955-FT. We reverse the order appealed in case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11697 - 2005-03-31
and the record, we affirm the judgment appealed in case No. 96-2955-FT. We reverse the order appealed in case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11697 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=208481 - 2018-02-13
not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=208481 - 2018-02-13
State v. Norman Earl Rhodes
(1984). The trial court may also consider: the defendant's past record of criminal offenses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9011 - 2005-03-31
(1984). The trial court may also consider: the defendant's past record of criminal offenses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9011 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
to reconvene the hearing and make a record sufficient to meet the rules regarding confidential informants
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60366 - 2011-02-23
to reconvene the hearing and make a record sufficient to meet the rules regarding confidential informants
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60366 - 2011-02-23
COURT OF APPEALS
and the defendant has the burden to show unreasonableness from the record. Id. “The primary considerations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62911 - 2011-04-19
and the defendant has the burden to show unreasonableness from the record. Id. “The primary considerations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=62911 - 2011-04-19
[PDF]
State v. Karl P. Breitweiser
The State contends that because the record supports a determination that the conduct underlying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4567 - 2017-09-19
The State contends that because the record supports a determination that the conduct underlying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4567 - 2017-09-19