Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3541 - 3550 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 3541 - 3550 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
State v. Paul L. Wolfe
) for the possession charge. Because Wolfe was unable to make bail, he was in custody until sentencing for a total
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2648 - 2006-03-22
) for the possession charge. Because Wolfe was unable to make bail, he was in custody until sentencing for a total
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2648 - 2006-03-22
Mary C. Volker v. Oliver A. Pentinmaki, Jr.
of several motions related to his divorce and the support and custody of his children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8236 - 2005-03-31
of several motions related to his divorce and the support and custody of his children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8236 - 2005-03-31
Mary C. Volker v. Oliver A. Pentinmaki, Jr.
of several motions related to his divorce and the support and custody of his children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8372 - 2005-03-31
of several motions related to his divorce and the support and custody of his children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8372 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
rulings (1) denying his motion to suppress statements, (2) admitting the recording of his custodial
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118620 - 2014-08-05
rulings (1) denying his motion to suppress statements, (2) admitting the recording of his custodial
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118620 - 2014-08-05
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
) denying his motion to suppress statements, (2) admitting the recording of his custodial interrogation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=118620 - 2014-09-15
) denying his motion to suppress statements, (2) admitting the recording of his custodial interrogation
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=118620 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
daughter, Carrie.2 Mary also appeals from the court’s order denying her postdisposition motion in which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=728975 - 2023-11-15
daughter, Carrie.2 Mary also appeals from the court’s order denying her postdisposition motion in which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=728975 - 2023-11-15
State v. Richard K. Fischer
)(a) and 939.05(1) (1999-2000).[1] Fischer argues that the trial court erred in denying his suppression motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4840 - 2005-03-31
)(a) and 939.05(1) (1999-2000).[1] Fischer argues that the trial court erred in denying his suppression motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4840 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Richard K. Fischer
in denying his suppression motion because he was never read his Miranda 2 rights prior to the taking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4840 - 2017-09-19
in denying his suppression motion because he was never read his Miranda 2 rights prior to the taking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4840 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
NOTICE
and they have three minor children. They have joint legal custody of the children and share physical
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56805 - 2014-09-15
and they have three minor children. They have joint legal custody of the children and share physical
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56805 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
minor children. They have joint legal custody of the children and share physical placement under a 2005
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56805 - 2010-11-23
minor children. They have joint legal custody of the children and share physical placement under a 2005
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56805 - 2010-11-23