Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17071 - 17080 of 59253 for SMALL CLAIMS.
Search results 17071 - 17080 of 59253 for SMALL CLAIMS.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Prairie) and dismissed his case because he did not properly serve his claim alleging “Excessive
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=182430 - 2017-09-21
Prairie) and dismissed his case because he did not properly serve his claim alleging “Excessive
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=182430 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Mark Anthony Solorio
postconviction motion. He raises one claim of error: that the trial court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18775 - 2017-09-21
postconviction motion. He raises one claim of error: that the trial court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18775 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of confidential informants. We reject his claims and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2 Smith was convicted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76820 - 2014-09-15
of confidential informants. We reject his claims and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2 Smith was convicted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76820 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclusion that the issues lacked arguable merit. We also addressed and rejected the claims Edmonson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1011166 - 2025-09-16
conclusion that the issues lacked arguable merit. We also addressed and rejected the claims Edmonson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1011166 - 2025-09-16
COURT OF APPEALS
. Stat. § 974.06 motion for plea withdrawal, claiming his pleas were not knowingly, intelligently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93884 - 2013-03-11
. Stat. § 974.06 motion for plea withdrawal, claiming his pleas were not knowingly, intelligently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=93884 - 2013-03-11
CA Blank Order
a sufficient reason for failing to raise his postconviction claims during the course of his no-merit appeal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94020 - 2013-03-12
a sufficient reason for failing to raise his postconviction claims during the course of his no-merit appeal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94020 - 2013-03-12
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and analysis of the merits of Brown’s various claims. Appellate counsel explains that Brown’s multiplicity
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=327506 - 2021-01-26
and analysis of the merits of Brown’s various claims. Appellate counsel explains that Brown’s multiplicity
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=327506 - 2021-01-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
contends that we should exercise our discretion to address his claim. We decline and conclude the issue
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=194719 - 2017-09-21
contends that we should exercise our discretion to address his claim. We decline and conclude the issue
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=194719 - 2017-09-21
State v. Donald F. Sheffey
for postconviction relief. Sheffey argues that: (1) he was not allowed to present evidence in support of his claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24910 - 2006-04-26
for postconviction relief. Sheffey argues that: (1) he was not allowed to present evidence in support of his claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24910 - 2006-04-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
motion. The circuit court determined that Maddox’s claims were procedurally barred by State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=86885 - 2014-09-15
motion. The circuit court determined that Maddox’s claims were procedurally barred by State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=86885 - 2014-09-15