Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3791 - 3800 of 10403 for ed.
Search results 3791 - 3800 of 10403 for ed.
Nancy D. McNamara v. Edward J. McNamara
that “the obvious intent behind the formula was that Ed[ward] would not benefit from any increases in the pension
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16232 - 2005-03-31
that “the obvious intent behind the formula was that Ed[ward] would not benefit from any increases in the pension
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16232 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
the trial court “follow[ed] that stipulated, joint sentencing recommendation.” ¶16 In a written order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97212 - 2013-05-28
the trial court “follow[ed] that stipulated, joint sentencing recommendation.” ¶16 In a written order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97212 - 2013-05-28
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 7, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
right to an additional test was “frustrate[ed] and/or den[ied].” The trial court agreed and granted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28031 - 2007-02-06
right to an additional test was “frustrate[ed] and/or den[ied].” The trial court agreed and granted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28031 - 2007-02-06
[PDF]
State v. Christopher D. Brown
Justice— Prosecution Function and Defense Function, Standard 3-5.8 (3d ed. 1993), provides: Standard
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25946 - 2017-09-21
Justice— Prosecution Function and Defense Function, Standard 3-5.8 (3d ed. 1993), provides: Standard
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25946 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, the trial court knew only that a stipulation was “discuss[ed]” and that Carothers was “willing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85764 - 2014-09-15
, the trial court knew only that a stipulation was “discuss[ed]” and that Carothers was “willing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85764 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. 2d 594, 716 N.W.2d 906. A manifest injustice occurs “if a circuit court fail[ed] to establish
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=255386 - 2020-02-25
. 2d 594, 716 N.W.2d 906. A manifest injustice occurs “if a circuit court fail[ed] to establish
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=255386 - 2020-02-25
COURT OF APPEALS
testified that he “guess[ed]” that the Gangster Disciples and Vice Lords were enemies. In a statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=64699 - 2011-05-24
testified that he “guess[ed]” that the Gangster Disciples and Vice Lords were enemies. In a statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=64699 - 2011-05-24
COURT OF APPEALS
was a Class H felony. Martin further asserted the sentencing court’s questions about Hill’s record “show[ed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107102 - 2014-01-21
was a Class H felony. Martin further asserted the sentencing court’s questions about Hill’s record “show[ed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107102 - 2014-01-21
CA Blank Order
that “the evidence destroyed ‘possess[ed] an exculpatory value that was apparent to those who had custody
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132524 - 2014-12-29
that “the evidence destroyed ‘possess[ed] an exculpatory value that was apparent to those who had custody
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=132524 - 2014-12-29
WI App 15 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2010AP599-CR Complete Titl...
the search. Because we conclude that the police officers “reasonabl[y] … believe[d] the vehicle contain[ed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58245 - 2011-01-30
the search. Because we conclude that the police officers “reasonabl[y] … believe[d] the vehicle contain[ed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=58245 - 2011-01-30