Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4641 - 4650 of 63199 for records.
Search results 4641 - 4650 of 63199 for records.
State v. Michael Strutz
reviewed the record, including Strutz’s court appearances and the parties’ plea discussions. From
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14593 - 2005-03-31
reviewed the record, including Strutz’s court appearances and the parties’ plea discussions. From
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14593 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. We have independently reviewed the record and the no-merit report, as mandated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190248 - 2017-09-21
. We have independently reviewed the record and the no-merit report, as mandated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190248 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, the majority of the video recording of the child’s interview by police officer Emilee Nottestad was played
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=173763 - 2017-09-21
, the majority of the video recording of the child’s interview by police officer Emilee Nottestad was played
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=173763 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
record that Joe’s Crushing purchased the Bobcat as part of the bankruptcy sale of CAM’s assets
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141345 - 2015-05-12
record that Joe’s Crushing purchased the Bobcat as part of the bankruptcy sale of CAM’s assets
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141345 - 2015-05-12
CA Blank Order
considering the report and the response, and after conducting an independent review of the record as mandated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107048 - 2014-01-16
considering the report and the response, and after conducting an independent review of the record as mandated
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107048 - 2014-01-16
[PDF]
State v. Lloyd Edwin Sellers
of the appellate record. Accordingly, we affirm. I. Sometime after 10:00 p.m. on October 28, 1994, or during
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10976 - 2017-09-19
of the appellate record. Accordingly, we affirm. I. Sometime after 10:00 p.m. on October 28, 1994, or during
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10976 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the record, we determined there was a potentially meritorious sentence credit issue and ordered counsel
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178726 - 2017-09-21
of the record, we determined there was a potentially meritorious sentence credit issue and ordered counsel
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178726 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
into the record. Defense counsel orally supplemented the record with the following facts: (1) the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252249 - 2020-01-09
into the record. Defense counsel orally supplemented the record with the following facts: (1) the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252249 - 2020-01-09
CA Blank Order
a response. We have considered the no-merit report, and we have independently reviewed the record. We
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=145379 - 2006-03-15
a response. We have considered the no-merit report, and we have independently reviewed the record. We
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=145379 - 2006-03-15
State v. Lamont Williams
not request that voir dire be recorded, thereby depriving this court of the ability to review his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9834 - 2005-03-31
not request that voir dire be recorded, thereby depriving this court of the ability to review his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9834 - 2005-03-31