Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 44321 - 44330 of 58805 for do.

[PDF] State v. Marvin D. Doyle
. Penalty enhancers that subject a defendant to additional years of incarceration do not convert
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9463 - 2017-09-19

County of Dunn v. Gerald J. Trainor
a horizontal gaze nystagamus test and refused to do any field sobriety tests while commenting, “I did your test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3631 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
misunderstanding of the effect of such titling. ¶9 A court in equity can reform written instruments that do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=139726 - 2015-04-14

State v. Debra A. Sledge
modification. We do not agree. A “new factor” is “a fact or set of facts highly relevant to the imposition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14004 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 12, 2012 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appe...
, but decided not to do so because he did not believe an expert was needed to show that Green was not impartial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80889 - 2012-04-11

David A. Clark v. Gary R. McCaughtry
quiver and cream. Clark wrote a letter back to Beiber responding: All of our girls here are doing just
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14507 - 2005-03-31

State v. Joseph O. Corbisier
, just as judges and juries do at trials. To the extent an officer finds the informant credible
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=21268 - 2006-02-06

COURT OF APPEALS
factor is a question of law that this court decides independently. Id., ¶33. If the facts do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87625 - 2012-10-01

COURT OF APPEALS
to the admissibility of evidence when they fail to do so before the [trial] court.”). II. The July 3, 1990 incident
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34886 - 2008-12-15

[PDF] State v. James R. Schiller
. Because this argument was not a basis for the court’s decision, we do not discuss it further. ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2574 - 2017-09-19