Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 5611 - 5620 of 66224 for did.

[PDF] State v. Jeffrey L. Hineman - 2020AP000226
that he told his dad, and his dad “kicked [Hineman] out.” When asked if Hineman ever did anything else
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=455859 - 2021-11-24

[PDF] State v. Tyrone Booker - 2004AP001435
did not view the video alleged to be "harmful material," but instead heard only the children's
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25745 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Heather A. Markwardt - 2006AP002871
that Markwardt said: “I should just have remained silent.” The trial court did not make a factual finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30711 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Winnebago County v. J.D.J. - 2022AP001138
medication and treatment. J.D.J. asserts that he received an unfair trial because the trial court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=625636 - 2023-02-22

[PDF] James C. Bourne v. Melli Law, S.C. - 2017AP001166
We further conclude that the court did not erroneously exercise its discretion in denying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=227661 - 2018-12-17

[PDF] State v. Jeffrey A. Huck - 1999AP001285
six-person juries, was constitutional. ¶2 We conclude that the defendants did not receive
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17518 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Jeffrey A. Huck - 1999AP001283
six-person juries, was constitutional. ¶2 We conclude that the defendants did not receive
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17516 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Jesse Franklin - 1999AP000743
six-person juries, was constitutional. ¶2 We conclude that the defendants did not receive
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17490 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Jeffrey A. Huck - 1999AP001284
six-person juries, was constitutional. ¶2 We conclude that the defendants did not receive
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17517 - 2017-09-21

State v. Tyrone Booker - 2004AP001435
the jury's verdict because the jury did not view the video alleged to be "harmful material," but instead
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25745 - 2006-06-28