Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34121 - 34130 of 63579 for records.
Search results 34121 - 34130 of 63579 for records.
[PDF]
State v. Carl E. V.
that there was nothing in the record suggesting that this would not be the No. 97-3018-FT 3 case in a high
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13146 - 2017-09-21
that there was nothing in the record suggesting that this would not be the No. 97-3018-FT 3 case in a high
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13146 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
reconsideration of his motion. Upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=524532 - 2022-05-24
reconsideration of his motion. Upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=524532 - 2022-05-24
[PDF]
WI 119
that Mr. Lieuallen's reinstatement will not be detrimental to the public but, given the record
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30379 - 2014-09-15
that Mr. Lieuallen's reinstatement will not be detrimental to the public but, given the record
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30379 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we conclude there is no arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=111770 - 2017-09-21
review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we conclude there is no arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=111770 - 2017-09-21
Charlene S. Mathewson v. Paul H. Mathewson
submitted memorandum briefs. Upon review of those memoranda and the record, we affirm the trial court's
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8410 - 2005-03-31
submitted memorandum briefs. Upon review of those memoranda and the record, we affirm the trial court's
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8410 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
and that he was credited $1084. Carmichael’s contention is not supported by facts in the record. Because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68384 - 2011-07-25
and that he was credited $1084. Carmichael’s contention is not supported by facts in the record. Because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68384 - 2011-07-25
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
his motion for reconsideration. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=927357 - 2025-03-18
his motion for reconsideration. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=927357 - 2025-03-18
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=185277 - 2017-09-21
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=185277 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. § 974.06 (2023-24)1 motion for postconviction relief. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1016666 - 2025-09-30
. § 974.06 (2023-24)1 motion for postconviction relief. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1016666 - 2025-09-30
Clarence Werner v. Wayne Nohelty
determination that the evidence Werner presented was not newly-discovered evidence. Our review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15508 - 2005-03-31
determination that the evidence Werner presented was not newly-discovered evidence. Our review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15508 - 2005-03-31