Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 40521 - 40530 of 50521 for our.
Search results 40521 - 40530 of 50521 for our.
[PDF]
Lacrosse County v. Mark P.
). Our primary purpose when interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislature's intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10165 - 2017-09-19
). Our primary purpose when interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislature's intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10165 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Lacrosse County v. Mark P.
). Our primary purpose when interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislature's intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10164 - 2017-09-19
). Our primary purpose when interpreting a statute is to give effect to the legislature's intent
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10164 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2018AP454-CRNM 7 Our independent review of the record reveals no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219559 - 2018-09-19
2018AP454-CRNM 7 Our independent review of the record reveals no other potential issues
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219559 - 2018-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
motion for sentence modification. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=669710 - 2023-06-20
motion for sentence modification. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=669710 - 2023-06-20
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
plea colloquy. Based upon our review of the briefs and Record, we conclude at conference
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=989591 - 2025-07-30
plea colloquy. Based upon our review of the briefs and Record, we conclude at conference
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=989591 - 2025-07-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
” at the time he was questioned about whether he had a firearm at his residence. We begin our analysis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=185129 - 2017-09-21
” at the time he was questioned about whether he had a firearm at his residence. We begin our analysis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=185129 - 2017-09-21
State v. Gregory M. Davis
the circumstances of this case, we think our reasoning in Ellenbecker applies, and the conclusion as well: Loud did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11438 - 2005-03-31
the circumstances of this case, we think our reasoning in Ellenbecker applies, and the conclusion as well: Loud did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11438 - 2005-03-31
State v. Xavier Lorenzo Brown
repeats his “new factor” arguments. In reviewing claims of unduly harsh criminal sentences, our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9491 - 2005-03-31
repeats his “new factor” arguments. In reviewing claims of unduly harsh criminal sentences, our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9491 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
(citations omitted). ¶10 Our application of this test to determine whether Johnson was entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76557 - 2012-01-17
(citations omitted). ¶10 Our application of this test to determine whether Johnson was entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=76557 - 2012-01-17
COURT OF APPEALS
Our conclusion that Mitchell’s attorney did not perform deficiently obviates the need to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33035 - 2008-06-16
Our conclusion that Mitchell’s attorney did not perform deficiently obviates the need to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33035 - 2008-06-16