Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1671 - 1680 of 68468 for did.
Search results 1671 - 1680 of 68468 for did.
COURT OF APPEALS
that the statute involved was unconstitutional; because the trial court did not err in denying the suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33865 - 2008-09-02
that the statute involved was unconstitutional; because the trial court did not err in denying the suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33865 - 2008-09-02
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED January 30, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
did address on cross-examination the undercover police officer’s assumptions that Hernandez
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27936 - 2007-01-29
did address on cross-examination the undercover police officer’s assumptions that Hernandez
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27936 - 2007-01-29
[PDF]
State v. James D. Ryan
conclude the circuit court did not err on any of these points and we therefore affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7661 - 2017-09-19
conclude the circuit court did not err on any of these points and we therefore affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7661 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Christopher Anson
of the inadmissible statements did not impel Anson to take the stand. We agree and conclude that Anson is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6537 - 2017-09-19
of the inadmissible statements did not impel Anson to take the stand. We agree and conclude that Anson is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6537 - 2017-09-19
State v. Christopher Anson
of the inadmissible statements did not impel Anson to take the stand. We agree and conclude that Anson is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6537 - 2005-03-31
of the inadmissible statements did not impel Anson to take the stand. We agree and conclude that Anson is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6537 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
that the statute involved was unconstitutional; because the trial court did not err in denying the suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33865 - 2014-09-15
that the statute involved was unconstitutional; because the trial court did not err in denying the suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33865 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael S. Johnson
. King did not see who fired the shots. The white suspect jumped over a fence. King pursued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11989 - 2017-09-21
. King did not see who fired the shots. The white suspect jumped over a fence. King pursued
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11989 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
in which she delivered her, but that Kostic did not obtain informed consent from Alexis’ mother, Tina
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=183642 - 2017-09-21
in which she delivered her, but that Kostic did not obtain informed consent from Alexis’ mother, Tina
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=183642 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
argues that the circuit court erred by determining that his trial counsel did not render ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=786768 - 2024-04-09
argues that the circuit court erred by determining that his trial counsel did not render ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=786768 - 2024-04-09
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 14, 2010 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Cour...
, but it did not state its reasons for exercising its discretion to deny an evidentiary hearing. However, when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57825 - 2005-03-31
, but it did not state its reasons for exercising its discretion to deny an evidentiary hearing. However, when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57825 - 2005-03-31