Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 33931 - 33940 of 63758 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 33931 - 33940 of 63758 for Motion for joint custody.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an evidentiary hearing on Hoffman’s motion, but before rendering a decision, the court visited the site
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=71233 - 2014-09-15
an evidentiary hearing on Hoffman’s motion, but before rendering a decision, the court visited the site
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=71233 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for sentence modification based on an alleged new factor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=781114 - 2024-03-27
that the circuit court erred in denying his motion for sentence modification based on an alleged new factor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=781114 - 2024-03-27
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 13, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Cour...
motion to suppress because the arresting officer did not have reasonable suspicion to make a traffic stop
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28123 - 2007-02-12
motion to suppress because the arresting officer did not have reasonable suspicion to make a traffic stop
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28123 - 2007-02-12
State v. Antonio Q. Cruz
. Cruz appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3359 - 2005-03-31
. Cruz appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3359 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
on the Department’s motion to dismiss and did not address his cross-motion for summary judgment. However, because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60265 - 2011-02-23
on the Department’s motion to dismiss and did not address his cross-motion for summary judgment. However, because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60265 - 2011-02-23
Village of Hales Corners v. Michael V. Hendricks
court’s March 24, 2003 orders denying his motions for reconsideration. In those orders, the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6482 - 2005-03-31
court’s March 24, 2003 orders denying his motions for reconsideration. In those orders, the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6482 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
erroneously exercised its discretion by denying his motion for a mistrial. Because we conclude that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=51299 - 2010-06-29
erroneously exercised its discretion by denying his motion for a mistrial. Because we conclude that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=51299 - 2010-06-29
COURT OF APPEALS
his postconviction motion.[1] Because the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86884 - 2012-09-10
his postconviction motion.[1] Because the circuit court did not erroneously exercise its sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86884 - 2012-09-10
COURT OF APPEALS
order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He contends on appeal that the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76100 - 2012-01-10
order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He contends on appeal that the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76100 - 2012-01-10
[PDF]
State v. Charles Jones
denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. He argues: (1) his conviction was obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16139 - 2017-09-21
denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. He argues: (1) his conviction was obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16139 - 2017-09-21