Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4801 - 4810 of 20930 for word.
Search results 4801 - 4810 of 20930 for word.
COURT OF APPEALS
of the action. In other words, if the action had proceeded to an adjudication of Melody’s paternity, Earl might
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30998 - 2007-11-28
of the action. In other words, if the action had proceeded to an adjudication of Melody’s paternity, Earl might
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30998 - 2007-11-28
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
” and “couldn’t tell me anything.” In other words, Lee “wanted some more time to talk” to his attorney. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=447887 - 2021-11-02
” and “couldn’t tell me anything.” In other words, Lee “wanted some more time to talk” to his attorney. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=447887 - 2021-11-02
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
on an unreasonable definition of the word “appear.” He argues that “appear” simply means to show up initially
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157113 - 2017-09-21
on an unreasonable definition of the word “appear.” He argues that “appear” simply means to show up initially
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=157113 - 2017-09-21
[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]
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=4634 - 2017-09-19
restrictive alternatives. We disagree. Admittedly, the statute repeatedly uses the word “shall.” However
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4634 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
base … before and after court.” In other words, Vickers never told Munger that Wright committed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170189 - 2017-09-21
base … before and after court.” In other words, Vickers never told Munger that Wright committed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170189 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
The italicized words were emphasized by the trial court in its postconviction order. No. 2005AP1823-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28315 - 2014-09-15
The italicized words were emphasized by the trial court in its postconviction order. No. 2005AP1823-CR
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28315 - 2014-09-15
[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
State v. Richard A. Moeck
, the court stated that Moeck was a repeater, not once, but three times, in some of the first words it spoke
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15048 - 2005-03-31
, the court stated that Moeck was a repeater, not once, but three times, in some of the first words it spoke
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15048 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
they must have “paraphrased or contorted” his words. He told the PO that during the exams he did not think
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46549 - 2010-02-02
they must have “paraphrased or contorted” his words. He told the PO that during the exams he did not think
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46549 - 2010-02-02