Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4781 - 4790 of 20860 for word.
Search results 4781 - 4790 of 20860 for word.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of the record.” Id. In other words, “[t]he reviewing court looks at the entirety of the record to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=961024 - 2025-05-28
of the record.” Id. In other words, “[t]he reviewing court looks at the entirety of the record to determine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=961024 - 2025-05-28
State v. Jeffrey A.T.
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4635 - 2005-03-31
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4635 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Syed Hasan Turab
the words, “the jury must be convinced to a moral certainty of guilt in order to find him guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10084 - 2017-09-19
the words, “the jury must be convinced to a moral certainty of guilt in order to find him guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10084 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Jeffrey A.T.
restrictive alternatives. We disagree. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4635 - 2017-09-19
restrictive alternatives. We disagree. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4635 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
.) The Department’s interpretation would add words to the phrasing selected by the sentencing court and change
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=639067 - 2023-03-30
.) The Department’s interpretation would add words to the phrasing selected by the sentencing court and change
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=639067 - 2023-03-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. and order at 3. In the instant proceeding, Grady repeats—at some points nearly word for word
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157478 - 2017-09-21
. and order at 3. In the instant proceeding, Grady repeats—at some points nearly word for word
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157478 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
MSI Preferred Services, Inc. v. Clements Agency
words, MSI cannot sever § 12.D(2) from the rest of § 12. No. 2005AP2604 7 ¶12 We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25919 - 2017-09-21
words, MSI cannot sever § 12.D(2) from the rest of § 12. No. 2005AP2604 7 ¶12 We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25919 - 2017-09-21
State v. Jeffrey A.T.
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4634 - 2005-03-31
. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However, nothing in the statute requires the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4634 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Randall S. Rueth
came in the back of the squad car. The refusal was informed despite the wording of the Informing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11299 - 2017-09-19
came in the back of the squad car. The refusal was informed despite the wording of the Informing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11299 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
Patricia Marie Jirschele v. Steven Joseph Jirschele
that the parties had written in the word “post” in handwriting in front of the word “secondary” in the provision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16102 - 2017-09-21
that the parties had written in the word “post” in handwriting in front of the word “secondary” in the provision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16102 - 2017-09-21