Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6521 - 6530 of 64227 for records/1000.
Search results 6521 - 6530 of 64227 for records/1000.
[PDF]
WI 61
as there was no evidence in the record that counsel had informed him of the possibility of a bifurcated plea
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99195 - 2014-09-15
as there was no evidence in the record that counsel had informed him of the possibility of a bifurcated plea
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99195 - 2014-09-15
State v. Raymond Sykes, Jr.
to it. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9055 - 2005-03-31
to it. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9055 - 2005-03-31
[MS WORD]
CA-150: Brief Cover
unpublished opinion cited under § 809.23 (3) (a) or (b); and (4) portions of the record essential
/formdisplay/CA-150.doc?formNumber=CA-150&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2021-06-30
unpublished opinion cited under § 809.23 (3) (a) or (b); and (4) portions of the record essential
/formdisplay/CA-150.doc?formNumber=CA-150&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2021-06-30
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
reviewing the appellant’s brief and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1008154 - 2025-09-11
reviewing the appellant’s brief and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1008154 - 2025-09-11
COURT OF APPEALS
is a three-fold rationale for requiring sentencing courts to make a sufficient record detailing their reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71632 - 2011-10-03
is a three-fold rationale for requiring sentencing courts to make a sufficient record detailing their reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71632 - 2011-10-03
CA Blank Order
was advised of his right to respond and has not responded. Upon our independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=140283 - 2015-04-20
was advised of his right to respond and has not responded. Upon our independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=140283 - 2015-04-20
[PDF]
State v. Michael Davis
consideration of the report and an independent review of the record, we conclude that there is no arguable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9743 - 2017-09-19
consideration of the report and an independent review of the record, we conclude that there is no arguable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9743 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Larry D. Cook
and has elected not to respond. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10362 - 2017-09-20
and has elected not to respond. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10362 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
reviewing the appellant’s brief and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1008154 - 2025-09-11
reviewing the appellant’s brief and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1008154 - 2025-09-11
[PDF]
State v. Byron D. Mitchell
the no merit report. After an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11396 - 2017-09-19
the no merit report. After an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11396 - 2017-09-19