Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 7421 - 7430 of 68274 for did.
Search results 7421 - 7430 of 68274 for did.
[PDF]
State v. Jimmie Johnson
the stuff up the road somewhere” because he did not want trouble in front of the tavern. As Caldwell
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5315 - 2017-09-19
the stuff up the road somewhere” because he did not want trouble in front of the tavern. As Caldwell
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5315 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Tammy L. D.
the CHIPS proceedings. Her chief complaint is that the juvenile court did not exercise its discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15791 - 2017-09-21
the CHIPS proceedings. Her chief complaint is that the juvenile court did not exercise its discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15791 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
Jon Lacombe, who did not work on Fountain’s case, testified as an expert witness for the State. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118785 - 2014-07-30
Jon Lacombe, who did not work on Fountain’s case, testified as an expert witness for the State. ¶6
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=118785 - 2014-07-30
COURT OF APPEALS
that the error was harmless. For the reasons we explain below, we also conclude that the circuit court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30959 - 2007-11-20
that the error was harmless. For the reasons we explain below, we also conclude that the circuit court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30959 - 2007-11-20
COURT OF APPEALS
)(b). His sole claim on appeal is that the circuit court erred when it did not grant his suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98666 - 2013-07-01
)(b). His sole claim on appeal is that the circuit court erred when it did not grant his suppression
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98666 - 2013-07-01
[PDF]
NOTICE
discretion. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying the suppression motion and did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=39232 - 2014-09-15
discretion. We conclude that the trial court did not err in denying the suppression motion and did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=39232 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
WI APP 28
to confirm the parent’s waiver of the jury trial right on grounds for TPR. Here, though the court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=91543 - 2014-09-15
to confirm the parent’s waiver of the jury trial right on grounds for TPR. Here, though the court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=91543 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
that the trial court did not err in denying the suppression motion and did not erroneously exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39232 - 2009-08-10
that the trial court did not err in denying the suppression motion and did not erroneously exercise its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39232 - 2009-08-10
William Jungbauer v. Polk County
. In addition, zoning records did not accurately reflect a previous owner’s conversion of the structure from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2789 - 2005-03-31
. In addition, zoning records did not accurately reflect a previous owner’s conversion of the structure from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2789 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was played to the jury and did not err in determining that nothing prejudicial was played. Because we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=247873 - 2019-10-02
was played to the jury and did not err in determining that nothing prejudicial was played. Because we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=247873 - 2019-10-02