Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20801 - 20810 of 68502 for did.
Search results 20801 - 20810 of 68502 for did.
[PDF]
Josephine Eckendorf v. Richard Austin
the grant did not allocate specific space for the allowed uses. Atkinson, however, is inapposite because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2391 - 2017-09-19
the grant did not allocate specific space for the allowed uses. Atkinson, however, is inapposite because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2391 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Matthew A. Bennett
. For not more than 60 days.” Bennett’s prison sentence commenced at noon on October 27, 1998, and he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15329 - 2017-09-21
. For not more than 60 days.” Bennett’s prison sentence commenced at noon on October 27, 1998, and he did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15329 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Terrance Bernard Davis
other arguments, Davis asserted that his trial counsel did not adequately investigate Davis’s mental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7318 - 2017-09-20
other arguments, Davis asserted that his trial counsel did not adequately investigate Davis’s mental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7318 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
was not a document appealable as a matter of right because it did not contain language “dismissing” or “adjudging
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39679 - 2009-08-17
was not a document appealable as a matter of right because it did not contain language “dismissing” or “adjudging
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39679 - 2009-08-17
State v. Jose R.
the trial court did not make findings of fact in connection with its denial of Jose R.’s motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19172 - 2005-08-01
the trial court did not make findings of fact in connection with its denial of Jose R.’s motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19172 - 2005-08-01
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
“did not explain in its decision how the length of Richards’ deferment affected his security risk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=110580 - 2017-09-21
“did not explain in its decision how the length of Richards’ deferment affected his security risk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=110580 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Andrew C. Polhamus
the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion, we affirm. No(s). 98-1813-CR 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14196 - 2014-09-15
the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion, we affirm. No(s). 98-1813-CR 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14196 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Larry A. Tiepelman
that the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5240 - 2017-09-19
that the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5240 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
John J. Surinak v. John Kaishian
that the trial court erred in concluding that: (1) Kaishian did not have an ownership interest in the land
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12064 - 2017-09-21
that the trial court erred in concluding that: (1) Kaishian did not have an ownership interest in the land
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12064 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. However, although it did not use the term “overtrial,” it is plain from the transcript of the final
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112616 - 2017-09-21
. However, although it did not use the term “overtrial,” it is plain from the transcript of the final
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112616 - 2017-09-21