Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18141 - 18150 of 38697 for financial disclosure statement.

[PDF] State v. Bruce Sanders - 1999AP002081
sort of implied statement of No(s). 99-2081-CR 4 pressure or threat to make the jury’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15850 - 2017-09-21

State v. Bruce Sanders - 1999AP002081
may understand the court to be making some sort of implied statement of pressure or threat to make
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15850 - 2005-03-31

Carol L. Austin v. LIRC - 2006AP000557
commission decisions. In support, she relies on our statement in Lopez that de novo review is applicable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28347 - 2007-03-07

[PDF] Carol L. Austin v. LIRC - 2006AP000557
on our statement in Lopez that de novo review is applicable “when the issue before the agency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28347 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Yusef L. Williams v. Matthew J. Frank - 2003AP001591
why the decision was made. But on the conduct report the box in front of the statement, “[t]he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6591 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Ronald Fillyaw, Jr. - 2020AP002117
,” titled, “Probable Cause Statement and Judicial Determination.” The form, prepared by one
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=592038 - 2022-11-22

[PDF] State v. Jerrod B. Horton - 2021AP002206
testimonial statement unless the declarant is unavailable and the defendant had a prior opportunity to cross
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=696823 - 2023-08-29

[PDF] State v. Johnathon W. Pearson - 2013AP001207
that, contrary to the court’s statement, Pearson will not be eligible for parole in his lifetime because
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=120664 - 2014-09-15

State v. Robert J. Panosh - 2005AP002126
into recanting the statements by her mother. ¶3 Panosh testified on his own behalf
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24835 - 2006-04-17

State v. Ellef E. Ellefson - 2000AP001218
conclude that, even if the admission of the statement from the PSI was error, it was harmless. ¶8
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2569 - 2005-03-31