Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 28911 - 28920 of 69114 for he.
Search results 28911 - 28920 of 69114 for he.
State v. Peter R. Burgeson
. WEDEMEYER, P.J.[1] Peter R. Burgeson appeals from a judgment entered after he pled guilty to operating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13136 - 2005-03-31
. WEDEMEYER, P.J.[1] Peter R. Burgeson appeals from a judgment entered after he pled guilty to operating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13136 - 2005-03-31
State v. Demitrius Jackson
to that location; once there, he approached a man in the street (“third party”), telling him that he wanted to buy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24979 - 2006-05-01
to that location; once there, he approached a man in the street (“third party”), telling him that he wanted to buy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24979 - 2006-05-01
State v. John W. Christ
Christ’s present motion because he failed to show that he could not have raised his issues when he appealed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19850 - 2005-10-05
Christ’s present motion because he failed to show that he could not have raised his issues when he appealed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19850 - 2005-10-05
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. No. 2020AP373-CRNM 2 awarded Lanier-Cotton reflected the entirety of the days that he spent in custody
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=345950 - 2021-03-11
. No. 2020AP373-CRNM 2 awarded Lanier-Cotton reflected the entirety of the days that he spent in custody
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=345950 - 2021-03-11
[PDF]
NOTICE
unless otherwise noted. No. 2007AP1842 2 concentration—first offense. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32797 - 2014-09-15
unless otherwise noted. No. 2007AP1842 2 concentration—first offense. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32797 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
disagree and affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 At the suppression hearing, officer Dan Glaze testified he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88591 - 2012-10-22
disagree and affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 At the suppression hearing, officer Dan Glaze testified he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88591 - 2012-10-22
COURT OF APPEALS
, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994).[1] We conclude that Morris’s motion for relief from what he characterizes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48740 - 2010-04-05
, 517 N.W.2d 157 (1994).[1] We conclude that Morris’s motion for relief from what he characterizes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48740 - 2010-04-05
COURT OF APPEALS
pled no contest in 1994 to three counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child. In June 2006, he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32474 - 2008-04-16
pled no contest in 1994 to three counts of first-degree sexual assault of a child. In June 2006, he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32474 - 2008-04-16
[PDF]
NOTICE
of a child. In June 2006, he moved to withdraw his pleas on the ground that he had not been informed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32474 - 2014-09-15
of a child. In June 2006, he moved to withdraw his pleas on the ground that he had not been informed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32474 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2 that there was no reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle because he did not, in fact, cross
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238833 - 2019-04-08
2 that there was no reasonable suspicion to stop his vehicle because he did not, in fact, cross
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238833 - 2019-04-08