Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 41371 - 41380 of 57581 for id.
Search results 41371 - 41380 of 57581 for id.
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 16, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
to admit expert testimony, id., whether one witness’s testimony constituted improper commentary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27166 - 2006-11-15
to admit expert testimony, id., whether one witness’s testimony constituted improper commentary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27166 - 2006-11-15
[PDF]
County of Clark v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
to the Commission’s decision. Id. We afford “great weight” to the Commission’s determination because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13631 - 2017-09-21
to the Commission’s decision. Id. We afford “great weight” to the Commission’s determination because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13631 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
(quoted source omitted). Therefore, the “stop must not be unreasonable under the circumstances.” Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=171154 - 2017-09-21
(quoted source omitted). Therefore, the “stop must not be unreasonable under the circumstances.” Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=171154 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Mark Hughes v. Stephen Puckett
filing fee provisions inapplicable. Id. at ¶16. ¶7 We agree with Hughes and Puckett that our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5313 - 2017-09-19
filing fee provisions inapplicable. Id. at ¶16. ¶7 We agree with Hughes and Puckett that our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5313 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Albert G. Holman
by the trier of fact is supported by sufficient evidence. See id. at 507. On appeal, this court must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16318 - 2017-09-21
by the trier of fact is supported by sufficient evidence. See id. at 507. On appeal, this court must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16318 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Virginia R. Ray
, give the language its ordinary meaning. Id. at 225-26. “Statutory language is ambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5723 - 2017-09-19
, give the language its ordinary meaning. Id. at 225-26. “Statutory language is ambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5723 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to raise these claims. Id. Additionally, the plea-taking court ascertained Vaughn’s understanding
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219129 - 2018-09-19
to raise these claims. Id. Additionally, the plea-taking court ascertained Vaughn’s understanding
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219129 - 2018-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Bryce C. Nelson
unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. ANALYSIS ¶10 Warrantless searches are "per se" unreasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15752 - 2017-09-21
unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. ANALYSIS ¶10 Warrantless searches are "per se" unreasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15752 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
meaning. Id., ¶45. Courts interpret statutory language “in the context in which it is used
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=149553 - 2017-09-21
meaning. Id., ¶45. Courts interpret statutory language “in the context in which it is used
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=149553 - 2017-09-21
State v. James Sanicki, Jr.
and the facts of record.” Id. at 500. ¶7 A trial court may grant a new trial based on newly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3808 - 2005-03-31
and the facts of record.” Id. at 500. ¶7 A trial court may grant a new trial based on newly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3808 - 2005-03-31