Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18661 - 18670 of 68502 for did.
Search results 18661 - 18670 of 68502 for did.
State v. Harrison M. Marcum
” since he did not have any prior similar offenses. In this case, the presentence investigation report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25003 - 2006-05-02
” since he did not have any prior similar offenses. In this case, the presentence investigation report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25003 - 2006-05-02
[PDF]
NOTICE
that he did not dispute that the friend was the sole owner of the land at this time. When the friend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59100 - 2014-09-15
that he did not dispute that the friend was the sole owner of the land at this time. When the friend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59100 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Peter C. Ramuta
asked Ramuta if he had read and understood the plea questionnaire form, and he said he did. The court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5603 - 2017-09-19
asked Ramuta if he had read and understood the plea questionnaire form, and he said he did. The court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5603 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
briefly at the end of its sentencing comments when it stated that it did not oppose Williams’ eligibility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=66789 - 2012-02-28
briefly at the end of its sentencing comments when it stated that it did not oppose Williams’ eligibility
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=66789 - 2012-02-28
COURT OF APPEALS
, Duewell did not initially contest the alleged violations. He later testified that he did not threaten his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30579 - 2007-10-15
, Duewell did not initially contest the alleged violations. He later testified that he did not threaten his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30579 - 2007-10-15
COURT OF APPEALS
motion for a mistrial; did not ascertain whether Parrish knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34607 - 2008-11-17
motion for a mistrial; did not ascertain whether Parrish knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34607 - 2008-11-17
COURT OF APPEALS
that the circuit court lacked the authority to hold a hearing per Wis. Stat. § 55.10(2), as the GAL did not provide
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82366 - 2012-05-15
that the circuit court lacked the authority to hold a hearing per Wis. Stat. § 55.10(2), as the GAL did not provide
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82366 - 2012-05-15
CA Blank Order
,” but Kitsemble did not receive her requested relief. Id. at 867. In Huberty’s reply brief, he asserts
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=108028 - 2014-02-10
,” but Kitsemble did not receive her requested relief. Id. at 867. In Huberty’s reply brief, he asserts
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=108028 - 2014-02-10
State v. Daniel E. La Fave
(Whitty)[1] evidence, but he did not rely on that advice in reaching his decision to plead guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8696 - 2013-02-27
(Whitty)[1] evidence, but he did not rely on that advice in reaching his decision to plead guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8696 - 2013-02-27
COURT OF APPEALS
tests. The State argues the circuit court applied the wrong standard when it ruled that the officer did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32895 - 2008-06-02
tests. The State argues the circuit court applied the wrong standard when it ruled that the officer did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32895 - 2008-06-02