Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4121 - 4130 of 63537 for records.
Search results 4121 - 4130 of 63537 for records.
[PDF]
State v. Babette Davis
some No. 95-1703-CR -3- unreasonable or unjustifiable basis in the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9236 - 2017-09-19
some No. 95-1703-CR -3- unreasonable or unjustifiable basis in the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9236 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. No. 2018AP1614-CRNM 2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=256179 - 2020-03-17
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. No. 2018AP1614-CRNM 2
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=256179 - 2020-03-17
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
a response, and has elected not to do so. After reviewing the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92070 - 2014-09-15
a response, and has elected not to do so. After reviewing the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92070 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Peter R. Burgeson
sentence that he was serving. Because the record as a whole demonstrates that the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13136 - 2017-09-21
sentence that he was serving. Because the record as a whole demonstrates that the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13136 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
2 reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94809 - 2014-09-15
2 reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94809 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=158421 - 2017-09-21
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=158421 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=847013 - 2024-09-11
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=847013 - 2024-09-11
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=847013 - 2024-09-11
review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=847013 - 2024-09-11
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=147097 - 2017-09-21
not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=147097 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
are to the 2023-24 version. No. 2024AP188-CRNM 2 record, we conclude that there is no arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=953406 - 2025-05-08
are to the 2023-24 version. No. 2024AP188-CRNM 2 record, we conclude that there is no arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=953406 - 2025-05-08