Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 36051 - 36060 of 57315 for id.

[PDF] NOTICE
is an objective test. Id., ¶36. The following factors are relevant to that determination: 1. Whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=57522 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
court’s discretion. Id. at 525. A court properly exercises its discretion by applying accepted legal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31659 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] CA Blank Order
objectives.” Id., ¶41. Here, the circuit court permissibly determined that the rehabilitation should take
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=204999 - 2017-12-13

[PDF] State v. Kevin E. Murley
an arrest.” Id. at 22. However, in such a setting the officer must still have “specific
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8881 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] CA Blank Order
if the defendant does not make a sufficient showing on one of them. See id. at 697. Accepting
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=300630 - 2020-11-04

[PDF] CA Blank Order
motion is a question of law subject to de novo review. Id., ¶30. Here, the postconviction court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=748852 - 2024-01-09

State v. Gregory Wilkinson
court’s assessment of the individual’s honesty and credibility. Id. at 718. The circuit court’s finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5226 - 2005-03-31

State v. Andrew N. Bauerfield
representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness. Id. at 688. When examining counsel’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25758 - 2006-07-04

[PDF] NOTICE
and reasonable inferences from those facts, that an individual is violating the law.” Id. ¶4 Matuszek
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27979 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
or improper factors.’” Id., ¶72 (citations omitted). ¶6 The circuit court must consider the primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74191 - 2012-01-22