Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 53471 - 53480 of 64190 for records.

COURT OF APPEALS
) the jury was erroneously allowed during deliberation to listen to a tape recording of a phone conversation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49111 - 2010-04-19

[PDF] FICE OF THE CLERK
“for Restoration of Original Condition of Release.” Based upon our review of the briefs and Record, we conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1111255 - 2026-04-29

Spencer McClain v. Jerry Smith, Jr.
demonstrate that in his case the Commission examined his record and applied various criteria in reaching
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4058 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Dusan Jankovic v. Roger P. Petersen
not maximize the values of these properties. The photographs in the record show that the fence is located
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10034 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] City of Madison v. John M. Virnig
, satisfactory and convincing evidence that he was guilty of either charge. We conclude that the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12327 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
did not see an event does not mean it did not occur. An audio recording of the biting incident
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112186 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Milwaukee County v. Charmaine B.
as Mooney’s, who based their reports on a review of Charmaine’s medical records and information obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14355 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Clifford L.H., Jr.
an alleged criminal matter. The record is devoid of any circumstances which would have indicated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14718 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
—the record in this case does not reveal the reasoning, but electronic docket entries for the case indicate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99747 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Ajuana V. D. Smith
, in light of the record showing otherwise. By the Court.—Judgment and order affirmed. This opinion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5911 - 2017-09-19