Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 29961 - 29970 of 63536 for records.
Search results 29961 - 29970 of 63536 for records.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
motion for reconsideration. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=754710 - 2024-01-23
motion for reconsideration. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=754710 - 2024-01-23
COURT OF APPEALS
is supported by the record; (2) if the issue presents a legal question as to whether the undisputed facts here
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=126124 - 2014-11-05
is supported by the record; (2) if the issue presents a legal question as to whether the undisputed facts here
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=126124 - 2014-11-05
[PDF]
NOTICE
that discretion.” Id. “We will not reverse a discretionary determination by the trial court if the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26904 - 2014-09-15
that discretion.” Id. “We will not reverse a discretionary determination by the trial court if the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26904 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. No. 2023AP928-CRNM 2 record as mandated by Anders, counsel’s reports, and Compton’s response, we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=912420 - 2025-02-11
. No. 2023AP928-CRNM 2 record as mandated by Anders, counsel’s reports, and Compton’s response, we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=912420 - 2025-02-11
[PDF]
Phaedra P. v. Dennis A.
because it is based upon the UCCJA and the UCCJA is preempted by the PKPA. However, the record does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7165 - 2017-09-20
because it is based upon the UCCJA and the UCCJA is preempted by the PKPA. However, the record does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7165 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
claim, noting that the record established the total amount of restitution as $2,643.04. The court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=230803 - 2018-12-18
claim, noting that the record established the total amount of restitution as $2,643.04. The court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=230803 - 2018-12-18
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we summarily affirm the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=266601 - 2020-07-08
, and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we summarily affirm the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=266601 - 2020-07-08
[PDF]
NOTICE
in this latest motion. Jones offers no sufficient reason, and we can discern none from the record, why those
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34069 - 2014-09-15
in this latest motion. Jones offers no sufficient reason, and we can discern none from the record, why those
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34069 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
, and we can discern none from the record, why those issues were not raised previously, either in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34069 - 2008-09-22
, and we can discern none from the record, why those issues were not raised previously, either in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34069 - 2008-09-22
State v. Michael G. Kachelski
out of the plea and the sentences,” and incredible. There is evidence in the record to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12448 - 2005-03-31
out of the plea and the sentences,” and incredible. There is evidence in the record to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12448 - 2005-03-31