Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 54171 - 54180 of 74898 for public records.

[PDF] CA Blank Order
a hearing. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1010504 - 2025-09-17

State v. Tammy M.
on this Record that the State has adduced any evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that Tammy M
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24821 - 2006-04-17

State v. Daniel Joseph Chaulklin
. II. The material facts here are not disputed in the record. In concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8858 - 2005-03-31

State v. Brian M.
exemplary behavior during the term of the dispositional orders. The record contains the court’s rationale
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6459 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] NOTICE
“Omarr.” The State uses that spelling in its brief. Court records show, however, that Ford’s first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36852 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
only conclusory allegations, or if the record conclusively demonstrates that the defendant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46458 - 2010-02-01

State v. William Hardy Thornton, Jr.
motion to raise a question of fact, or presents only conclusory allegations, or if the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10283 - 2005-03-31

State v. Timothy T. Morgan
.” The sidebar then was conducted but not reported, and defense counsel made no further record of the basis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8565 - 2005-03-31

CA Blank Order
right to file a response, but he has not done so. After reviewing the no-merit report and the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=110177 - 2014-04-07

State v. Nick Allen
next. The record does not support these conclusions by the trial court. First, the detective’s answer
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10693 - 2005-03-31