Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 38041 - 38050 of 50147 for our.
Search results 38041 - 38050 of 50147 for our.
State v. Steve Norton
, however, presents an issue for the trial court’s discretionary determination, subject to our review under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3445 - 2005-03-31
, however, presents an issue for the trial court’s discretionary determination, subject to our review under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3445 - 2005-03-31
State v. Anthony M. Fletcher
information. In light of our resolution of the first claim of trial court error, we will not discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5317 - 2005-03-31
information. In light of our resolution of the first claim of trial court error, we will not discuss
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5317 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that the property was contraband.1 Based upon our review of the briefs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=694036 - 2023-08-23
that the property was contraband.1 Based upon our review of the briefs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=694036 - 2023-08-23
State v. John E. Triplett
was charged with intentionally retaining possession of her property. Our factual basis inquiry is conducted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12544 - 2005-03-31
was charged with intentionally retaining possession of her property. Our factual basis inquiry is conducted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12544 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
contends the circuit court made inadequate findings with respect to the parties’ earning capacity. Our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45689 - 2014-09-15
contends the circuit court made inadequate findings with respect to the parties’ earning capacity. Our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45689 - 2014-09-15
CA Blank Order
be no arguable merit to a challenge to the court’s sentencing discretion. Our independent review of the Record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102472 - 2013-09-25
be no arguable merit to a challenge to the court’s sentencing discretion. Our independent review of the Record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102472 - 2013-09-25
COURT OF APPEALS
A. Probable Cause for the Stop ¶12 Our supreme court has summarized the controlling law as follows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103152 - 2013-10-16
A. Probable Cause for the Stop ¶12 Our supreme court has summarized the controlling law as follows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103152 - 2013-10-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
omitted)). Our independent review of the record reveals no other issues of arguable merit. Therefore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=832965 - 2024-08-01
omitted)). Our independent review of the record reveals no other issues of arguable merit. Therefore
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=832965 - 2024-08-01
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
merit and will not discuss it further. Our review of the record discloses no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=162400 - 2017-09-21
merit and will not discuss it further. Our review of the record discloses no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=162400 - 2017-09-21
State v. Thomas C. Holden
the conviction. Our confidence in the outcome is not undermined by the nondisclosure of information which would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11183 - 2005-03-31
the conviction. Our confidence in the outcome is not undermined by the nondisclosure of information which would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11183 - 2005-03-31