Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6981 - 6990 of 64237 for records/1000.
Search results 6981 - 6990 of 64237 for records/1000.
[PDF]
State v. Kevin D. Waite
and Waite's pro se sentencing arguments together. Upon review of the record, we are satisfied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10609 - 2017-09-20
and Waite's pro se sentencing arguments together. Upon review of the record, we are satisfied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10609 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. John T. Neita
No. 95-2858-CR-NM -2- review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that any further
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9832 - 2017-09-19
No. 95-2858-CR-NM -2- review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that any further
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9832 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we No. 2018AP2385-CR 2 conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=316113 - 2020-12-23
. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we No. 2018AP2385-CR 2 conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=316113 - 2020-12-23
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
) it was “unclear from the record that the defendant understood that the plea was for a consecutive jail term
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251762 - 2019-12-23
) it was “unclear from the record that the defendant understood that the plea was for a consecutive jail term
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251762 - 2019-12-23
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
counsel’s no-merit report, and we have independently reviewed the record. We conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94654 - 2014-09-15
counsel’s no-merit report, and we have independently reviewed the record. We conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94654 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Janice Johnson Kuhn v. Charles V. James
and an expert witness, and (2) in granting summary judgment. Because the record offers no basis on which we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10921 - 2017-09-20
and an expert witness, and (2) in granting summary judgment. Because the record offers no basis on which we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10921 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=722201 - 2023-10-31
independent review of the record as mandated by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we conclude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=722201 - 2023-10-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to the criteria on the record.” Further, we have stated that “the [circuit] court must exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=407659 - 2021-08-11
to the criteria on the record.” Further, we have stated that “the [circuit] court must exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=407659 - 2021-08-11
CA Blank Order
reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we conclude that there are no arguably
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143231 - 2015-06-15
reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we conclude that there are no arguably
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143231 - 2015-06-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
provided ineffective assistance by failing to explore redacted portions of the victim’s medical records
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=54755 - 2014-09-15
provided ineffective assistance by failing to explore redacted portions of the victim’s medical records
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=54755 - 2014-09-15