Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31571 - 31580 of 50548 for our.
Search results 31571 - 31580 of 50548 for our.
[PDF]
State v. Bart E. Jenson
factor is particularly within the trial court’s discretion). Additionally, in our view, the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6382 - 2017-09-19
factor is particularly within the trial court’s discretion). Additionally, in our view, the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6382 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Terry L. Holloway
to the detention. Therefore, we do not include in our analysis the veering, crossing the centerline and stopping
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5627 - 2017-09-19
to the detention. Therefore, we do not include in our analysis the veering, crossing the centerline and stopping
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5627 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
it raises are without merit and will not discuss them further. Our review of the record discloses
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=307029 - 2020-11-24
it raises are without merit and will not discuss them further. Our review of the record discloses
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=307029 - 2020-11-24
[PDF]
State v. Daniel T. Suchla
of facts; therefore, in our review we will consider the application of the implied consent statute
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9945 - 2017-09-19
of facts; therefore, in our review we will consider the application of the implied consent statute
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9945 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclusion that any such challenge would lack arguable merit. Our review of the record discloses no other
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=699426 - 2023-09-06
conclusion that any such challenge would lack arguable merit. Our review of the record discloses no other
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=699426 - 2023-09-06
COURT OF APPEALS
not. But, we will not base our opinion on whether the challenged evidence was relevant to the charge for which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91641 - 2013-01-15
not. But, we will not base our opinion on whether the challenged evidence was relevant to the charge for which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91641 - 2013-01-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to a challenge to the circuit court’s sentencing decision. Upon our independent review of the record, we have
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=673832 - 2023-07-05
to a challenge to the circuit court’s sentencing decision. Upon our independent review of the record, we have
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=673832 - 2023-07-05
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985)). ¶10 Our review of an ineffective assistance claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190859 - 2017-09-21
v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985)). ¶10 Our review of an ineffective assistance claim
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190859 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
not qualify for program eligibility). Our review of the record discloses no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=393943 - 2021-07-20
not qualify for program eligibility). Our review of the record discloses no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=393943 - 2021-07-20
[PDF]
State v. Thomas J. Becker
report's discussion of these issues as our own. Based upon this court's review of the record, this court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10498 - 2017-09-20
report's discussion of these issues as our own. Based upon this court's review of the record, this court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10498 - 2017-09-20