Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6811 - 6820 of 74509 for public records.
Search results 6811 - 6820 of 74509 for public records.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2 reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=127874 - 2017-09-21
2 reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=127874 - 2017-09-21
CA Blank Order
no-merit report per this court’s order.[2] After reviewing the record and counsel’s reports, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=110218 - 2014-04-15
no-merit report per this court’s order.[2] After reviewing the record and counsel’s reports, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=110218 - 2014-04-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=158421 - 2017-09-21
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=158421 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
prior record, the sentence imposed does not “shock public sentiment and violate the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92070 - 2014-09-15
prior record, the sentence imposed does not “shock public sentiment and violate the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92070 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
no-merit report. After reviewing the record, counsel’s reports, and Rawls’ response, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245255 - 2019-08-21
no-merit report. After reviewing the record, counsel’s reports, and Rawls’ response, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245255 - 2019-08-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2 the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176513 - 2017-09-21
2 the record and counsel’s report, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176513 - 2017-09-21
CA Blank Order
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92740 - 2013-02-11
. Upon our independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=92740 - 2013-02-11
CA Blank Order
a response, and has elected not to do so. After reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99690 - 2013-07-23
a response, and has elected not to do so. After reviewing the record and counsel’s report, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99690 - 2013-07-23
[PDF]
State v. David T.O.
he had no prior record and was receptive to future treatment. Both sides correctly state
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10741 - 2017-09-20
he had no prior record and was receptive to future treatment. Both sides correctly state
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10741 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
the record, counsel’s reports, and Hess’ response, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=258752 - 2020-04-29
the record, counsel’s reports, and Hess’ response, we conclude that there are no issues with arguable merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=258752 - 2020-04-29