Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 27961 - 27970 of 56421 for General Account Probate.
Search results 27961 - 27970 of 56421 for General Account Probate.
COURT OF APPEALS
to concurrent terms totaling thirty years in prison and fifteen years’ probation. His conviction was affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31017 - 2007-12-04
to concurrent terms totaling thirty years in prison and fifteen years’ probation. His conviction was affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31017 - 2007-12-04
[PDF]
State v. Rickey A. Taylor
is so well ingrained, that probation, parole or prison has done little for him to change the course
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7338 - 2017-09-20
is so well ingrained, that probation, parole or prison has done little for him to change the course
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7338 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Dennis L. Steele
had not been successful on probation or parole. The court also observed that Steele had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13267 - 2017-09-21
had not been successful on probation or parole. The court also observed that Steele had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13267 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
a twelve-year sentence for the drug offense and ordered Baldwin to serve a consecutive term of probation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58303 - 2010-12-27
a twelve-year sentence for the drug offense and ordered Baldwin to serve a consecutive term of probation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58303 - 2010-12-27
State v. James C. Sarlund
. Sentence was withheld in all cases and Sarlund was placed on probation for varying terms, with a total
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9190 - 2005-03-31
. Sentence was withheld in all cases and Sarlund was placed on probation for varying terms, with a total
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9190 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
Lonski to one year of probation. Lonski filed this direct appeal.[3] Discussion I. Sufficiency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49293 - 2010-04-26
Lonski to one year of probation. Lonski filed this direct appeal.[3] Discussion I. Sufficiency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49293 - 2010-04-26
COURT OF APPEALS
, in part, to rebut the position of the federal probation office that Jones should be denied a sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33032 - 2008-06-16
, in part, to rebut the position of the federal probation office that Jones should be denied a sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33032 - 2008-06-16
State v. James A. H.
for failure to provide potentially incriminating information to the probation officer was a “denied benefit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4070 - 2005-03-31
for failure to provide potentially incriminating information to the probation officer was a “denied benefit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4070 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
sentenced Dillard to twelve months of probation, withheld a sentence, and required Dillard to perform
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=355091 - 2021-04-13
sentenced Dillard to twelve months of probation, withheld a sentence, and required Dillard to perform
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=355091 - 2021-04-13
[PDF]
State v. James A. H.
information to the probation officer was a “denied benefit” rather than a penalty for the purpose
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4070 - 2017-09-20
information to the probation officer was a “denied benefit” rather than a penalty for the purpose
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4070 - 2017-09-20