Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1601 - 1610 of 60458 for two's.
Search results 1601 - 1610 of 60458 for two's.
COURT OF APPEALS
his sentence modification motion. ¶2 A jury found Heimermann guilty of two counts of first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53891 - 2010-08-30
his sentence modification motion. ¶2 A jury found Heimermann guilty of two counts of first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53891 - 2010-08-30
[PDF]
State v. Warren A. Goodman
and affirm. I. BACKGROUND. Goodman received two trials; the first ended with a mistrial because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10198 - 2017-09-20
and affirm. I. BACKGROUND. Goodman received two trials; the first ended with a mistrial because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10198 - 2017-09-20
State v. Todd R. Gilbertson
that the sentence imposed on him is impossible. For the reasons set forth below, we reject Gilbertson’s first two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10481 - 2005-03-31
that the sentence imposed on him is impossible. For the reasons set forth below, we reject Gilbertson’s first two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10481 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Klavekoske also testified on behalf of the State. He testified that he met with VanRensselaer two separate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103179 - 2017-09-21
. Klavekoske also testified on behalf of the State. He testified that he met with VanRensselaer two separate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103179 - 2017-09-21
Ronald W. Morters v. Charles H. Barr
by his first two attorneys requesting that their legal fees be paid out of the settlement. The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4233 - 2005-03-31
by his first two attorneys requesting that their legal fees be paid out of the settlement. The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4233 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
review doctrine, justifies the two-year confinement period and six-year total sentence for a repeat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28916 - 2007-06-26
review doctrine, justifies the two-year confinement period and six-year total sentence for a repeat
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28916 - 2007-06-26
[PDF]
NOTICE
. The authorization stated that it would be “void” after two years. Specifically, the decision stated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48497 - 2014-09-15
. The authorization stated that it would be “void” after two years. Specifically, the decision stated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48497 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
felony and two misdemeanors. She was able to post $500 cash bond and was released from custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=583013 - 2022-10-28
felony and two misdemeanors. She was able to post $500 cash bond and was released from custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=583013 - 2022-10-28
COURT OF APPEALS
confinement plus three years’ extended supervision on count two. The sentences were ordered consecutive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33344 - 2008-07-15
confinement plus three years’ extended supervision on count two. The sentences were ordered consecutive
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33344 - 2008-07-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and May 2013, and the State agreed to recommend a global disposition of “more than two years initial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=125231 - 2017-09-21
and May 2013, and the State agreed to recommend a global disposition of “more than two years initial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=125231 - 2017-09-21