Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34791 - 34800 of 98406 for court records search online.
Search results 34791 - 34800 of 98406 for court records search online.
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
not nullify this court’s careful and independent review of the Record during the no-merit appeal wherein we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=960409 - 2025-05-28
not nullify this court’s careful and independent review of the Record during the no-merit appeal wherein we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=960409 - 2025-05-28
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
not nullify this court’s careful and independent review of the Record during the no-merit appeal wherein we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=960409 - 2025-05-28
not nullify this court’s careful and independent review of the Record during the no-merit appeal wherein we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=960409 - 2025-05-28
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
properly exercised its sentencing discretion. The record reveals that the court’s sentencing decision
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=250481 - 2019-11-19
properly exercised its sentencing discretion. The record reveals that the court’s sentencing decision
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=250481 - 2019-11-19
CA Blank Order
. We are satisfied, based upon the record, that the circuit court’s finding that Adams was more likely
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102592 - 2013-09-30
. We are satisfied, based upon the record, that the circuit court’s finding that Adams was more likely
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102592 - 2013-09-30
[PDF]
NOTICE
NOTICE COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 8, 2011 A. John
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59693 - 2014-09-15
NOTICE COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 8, 2011 A. John
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=59693 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
809.32 (2021-22).1 Ojeda has filed a response. Upon this court’s independent review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=817815 - 2024-06-25
809.32 (2021-22).1 Ojeda has filed a response. Upon this court’s independent review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=817815 - 2024-06-25
[PDF]
State v. Michael S. Danforth
for a psychological evaluation. The trial court excluded the records, and Danforth did not use them in his defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7582 - 2017-09-19
for a psychological evaluation. The trial court excluded the records, and Danforth did not use them in his defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7582 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
809.32 (2021-22).1 Ojeda has filed a response. Upon this court’s independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=817815 - 2024-06-25
809.32 (2021-22).1 Ojeda has filed a response. Upon this court’s independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=817815 - 2024-06-25
Sandra J. Nix v. Broy Company Manufacturing & Sales, Inc.
de novo, independent of the trial court's determination. Id. We examine the record to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9168 - 2005-03-31
de novo, independent of the trial court's determination. Id. We examine the record to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9168 - 2005-03-31
Mark Taylor v. Daniel Bertrand
. ¶5 On certiorari review, this court reviews the adjustment committee’s record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15376 - 2005-03-31
. ¶5 On certiorari review, this court reviews the adjustment committee’s record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15376 - 2005-03-31