Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9901 - 9910 of 98574 for civil court case status online.
Search results 9901 - 9910 of 98574 for civil court case status online.
State v. Bernhardt C. Thompson
to the court and it constituted sufficient proof of Thompson’s repeater status. Thompson also objects
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15440 - 2005-03-31
to the court and it constituted sufficient proof of Thompson’s repeater status. Thompson also objects
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15440 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Bernhardt C. Thompson
status. Thompson also objects to the trial court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, arguing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15440 - 2017-09-21
status. Thompson also objects to the trial court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, arguing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15440 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Bernhardt C. Thompson
status. Thompson also objects to the trial court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, arguing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15442 - 2017-09-21
status. Thompson also objects to the trial court’s exercise of its sentencing discretion, arguing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15442 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of dangerousness the circuit court applied in this case. Vicente’s testimony and report invoked the fifth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=753847 - 2024-01-24
of dangerousness the circuit court applied in this case. Vicente’s testimony and report invoked the fifth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=753847 - 2024-01-24
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
.” ¶32 In support of its findings, the trial court relied on several cases from other jurisdictions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=342955 - 2021-03-09
.” ¶32 In support of its findings, the trial court relied on several cases from other jurisdictions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=342955 - 2021-03-09
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to distinguish Delebreau, arguing that in that case “the defendant had been represented at one court appearance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=466375 - 2021-12-29
to distinguish Delebreau, arguing that in that case “the defendant had been represented at one court appearance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=466375 - 2021-12-29
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that “a defense of … inability to provide support … is not at issue in the case.” More fully, the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191966 - 2017-09-21
that “a defense of … inability to provide support … is not at issue in the case.” More fully, the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191966 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the work. The trial court granted the motion finding: This case “had a singular factual premise
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115151 - 2017-09-21
the work. The trial court granted the motion finding: This case “had a singular factual premise
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115151 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED October 6, 2021 Sheila T. Reiff Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=435213 - 2021-10-06
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED October 6, 2021 Sheila T. Reiff Clerk
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=435213 - 2021-10-06
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
court’s handling of the No. 2018AP1379 5 case and the Department’s noncompliance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=250322 - 2019-11-19
court’s handling of the No. 2018AP1379 5 case and the Department’s noncompliance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=250322 - 2019-11-19