Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31241 - 31250 of 56142 for so.

[PDF] CA Blank Order
a supplemental no-merit report so that he could address any issues Christophel might raise in his response
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204716 - 2017-12-04

[PDF] CA Blank Order
2 the report, was advised of his right to file a response, and has elected not to do so. After
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=214494 - 2018-06-20

[PDF] State v. James A. Lanzel
“unless the evidence, viewed most favorably to the [S]tate and the conviction, is so lacking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11683 - 2017-09-19

CA Blank Order
elected not to do so. After reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94809 - 2013-04-02

State v. Dwan L. Schuck
, and so I just feel like if I’m weighing these two on a balancing act, I’m going to come down on the side
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13876 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] NOTICE
for reconsideration and denied it. The circuit court did so because the motion did not properly argue the law under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30056 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
). I remand to the circuit court for an assessment of those costs and fees. ¶2 So far as the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=174091 - 2017-09-21

State v. John N. Mccoy
at 23-24. We conclude that the trial court failed to do so in this case. The trial court misinformed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8946 - 2005-03-31

State v. Scott D. Nash
contentions, in so doing, the agents not only complied with constitutional law but applicable DOC rules
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14652 - 2005-03-31

CA Blank Order
considered no improper factors and the sentences are not arguably so excessive as to shock public sentiment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97267 - 2013-05-28