Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 39351 - 39360 of 98406 for court records search online.

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 17, 2013 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of A...
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 17, 2013 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=105689 - 2013-12-16

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 17, 2013 Diane M. Fremgen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105689 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. John T. Trochinski, Jr.
, this court then relied on the entire record to determine that the defendant was aware of all
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16421 - 2017-09-21

State v. John T. Trochinski, Jr.
on the record.[6] In response to questions from the court, Trochinski indicated that he understood all
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16421 - 2005-03-31

Susan K. Kuykendall v. Kelly R. Kuykendall
of the record. At the hearing on the reconsideration motion, when counsel attempted to remind the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16142 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Susan K. Kuykendall v. Kelly R. Kuykendall
-2781 3 ΒΆ6 In addition, Susan argues that the record does not contain any comments by the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16142 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Case of the month - February 2012
understood. The court ruled that any failure to orally warn Negrete on the record was harmless error
/courts/resources/teacher/casemonth/docs/feb12.pdf - 2012-01-31

State v. Mark L. Dryden
submitted. Although that document is not of record, the court described it as: (1) increasing the amount
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14757 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Mark L. Dryden
that had been submitted. Although that document is not of record, the court described it as: (1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14757 - 2017-09-21

State v. Mark V. Reid
. This court reviewed the record and concluded that the trial court did not misuse its discretion at sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10037 - 2005-03-31