Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 47051 - 47060 of 68502 for did.
Search results 47051 - 47060 of 68502 for did.
COURT OF APPEALS
truck. Id. Although the officer did not independently observe any signs of erratic driving
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32519 - 2008-04-23
truck. Id. Although the officer did not independently observe any signs of erratic driving
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32519 - 2008-04-23
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. The court determined that due to his inexperience, the prosecutor likely did not “understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244704 - 2019-08-06
. The court determined that due to his inexperience, the prosecutor likely did not “understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244704 - 2019-08-06
COURT OF APPEALS
vehicles. The defense did not object to Sippel’s testimony, but cross-examined him. ¶11 On September
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68451 - 2011-07-26
vehicles. The defense did not object to Sippel’s testimony, but cross-examined him. ¶11 On September
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68451 - 2011-07-26
Frontsheet
Attorney Stubbins was to have filed the foreclosure complaints by October 2009. He did not do so, however
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=123953 - 2014-10-13
Attorney Stubbins was to have filed the foreclosure complaints by October 2009. He did not do so, however
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=123953 - 2014-10-13
Brenda Moore v. M.J. Kortsch
that in the second action, “Judge Cooper refused to allow me to state my case on August 7, 2000. But he did allow
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3063 - 2005-03-31
that in the second action, “Judge Cooper refused to allow me to state my case on August 7, 2000. But he did allow
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3063 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. The court determined that due to his inexperience, the prosecutor likely did not “understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244703 - 2019-08-06
. The court determined that due to his inexperience, the prosecutor likely did not “understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244703 - 2019-08-06
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
to June 22, 2017. The June 7, 2017 order was not returned to this court and T.D. did not file a response
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195057 - 2017-09-21
to June 22, 2017. The June 7, 2017 order was not returned to this court and T.D. did not file a response
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=195057 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. William E. Hall
demonstrated that he did not understand the nature or the elements of the offense in his prior plea. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2627 - 2017-09-19
demonstrated that he did not understand the nature or the elements of the offense in his prior plea. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2627 - 2017-09-19
Steven E. Mariades v. Marquette County
then asked whether the court was ruling that § 81.15 was inapplicable. The court did not respond
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13354 - 2005-03-31
then asked whether the court was ruling that § 81.15 was inapplicable. The court did not respond
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13354 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
SC Table of Pending Cases - added case 2022AP1349
and Police Commissioners Did the Chief of Police deprive an officer of Due Process by failing
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=757423 - 2024-01-29
and Police Commissioners Did the Chief of Police deprive an officer of Due Process by failing
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=757423 - 2024-01-29