Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 44001 - 44010 of 74812 for public records.
Search results 44001 - 44010 of 74812 for public records.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the no-merit report, but has not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=117599 - 2017-09-21
of the no-merit report, but has not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=117599 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the submissions and an independent review of the record, we conclude that the judgment may be summarily affirmed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245231 - 2019-08-13
of the submissions and an independent review of the record, we conclude that the judgment may be summarily affirmed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245231 - 2019-08-13
Angeline Boles v. Patrick Winnie
in the record to support the trial court's finding, the judgment is affirmed. The record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10704 - 2005-03-31
in the record to support the trial court's finding, the judgment is affirmed. The record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10704 - 2005-03-31
Michael A. Stauffacher v. Douglas E. Stoneman
parts of the record. First, at the conclusion of his testimony, the trial court asked Stoneman, “Do you
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10712 - 2005-03-31
parts of the record. First, at the conclusion of his testimony, the trial court asked Stoneman, “Do you
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10712 - 2005-03-31
Marathon County v. Terry R.H.
, based on the subject individual’s treatment record, that the individual would be a proper subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12794 - 2005-03-31
, based on the subject individual’s treatment record, that the individual would be a proper subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12794 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
agreement as it was described on the record at the plea hearing. Further, Lietz’s attorney testified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92929 - 2013-02-18
agreement as it was described on the record at the plea hearing. Further, Lietz’s attorney testified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92929 - 2013-02-18
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and lacked a reasonable basis. Based upon our review of the brief and record,1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=242928 - 2019-06-26
and lacked a reasonable basis. Based upon our review of the brief and record,1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=242928 - 2019-06-26
[PDF]
Angeline Boles v. Patrick Winnie
not gifts is clearly erroneous. Because we conclude there is substantial evidence in the record to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10704 - 2017-09-20
not gifts is clearly erroneous. Because we conclude there is substantial evidence in the record to support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10704 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
the question on the record and the prosecutor indicated no objection. There is nothing in the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65821 - 2011-06-14
the question on the record and the prosecutor indicated no objection. There is nothing in the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=65821 - 2011-06-14
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
is therefore entitled to resentencing. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197121 - 2017-09-26
is therefore entitled to resentencing. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197121 - 2017-09-26