Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1161 - 1170 of 17541 for ex.
Search results 1161 - 1170 of 17541 for ex.
COURT OF APPEALS
of the program violated the federal constitution’s ex post facto clause. ¶3 We reject Onyeukwu’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135726 - 2015-02-25
of the program violated the federal constitution’s ex post facto clause. ¶3 We reject Onyeukwu’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135726 - 2015-02-25
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
argues that repeal of the program violated the federal constitution’s ex post facto clause. ¶3 We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135726 - 2017-09-21
argues that repeal of the program violated the federal constitution’s ex post facto clause. ¶3 We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135726 - 2017-09-21
State v. Zena H.
to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied retroactively to her; (4) with respect
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15743 - 2005-03-31
to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied retroactively to her; (4) with respect
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15743 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Zena H.
in § 48.415(10) subjected her to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15743 - 2017-09-21
in § 48.415(10) subjected her to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15743 - 2017-09-21
Mark Vanderbeke v. Jeffrey Endicott
: State of Wisconsin ex rel. Mark Vanderbeke, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey Endicott, Warden
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17002 - 2005-03-31
: State of Wisconsin ex rel. Mark Vanderbeke, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey Endicott, Warden
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17002 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Mark Vanderbeke v. Jeffrey Endicott
of Wisconsin ex rel. Mark Vanderbeke, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey Endicott, Warden, Columbia County
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17002 - 2017-09-21
of Wisconsin ex rel. Mark Vanderbeke, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jeffrey Endicott, Warden, Columbia County
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17002 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Floyd P.
in § 48.415(10) subjected her to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15725 - 2017-09-21
in § 48.415(10) subjected her to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15725 - 2017-09-21
State v. Floyd P.
to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied retroactively to her; (4) with respect
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15725 - 2005-03-31
to an improper ex post facto law; (3) § 48.415(10) was improperly applied retroactively to her; (4) with respect
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15725 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
); and State ex rel. McCoy v. Wisconsin Ct. of Appeals, 137 Wis. 2d 90, 403 N.W.2d 449 (1987), aff’d, 486 U.S
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=916618 - 2025-02-19
); and State ex rel. McCoy v. Wisconsin Ct. of Appeals, 137 Wis. 2d 90, 403 N.W.2d 449 (1987), aff’d, 486 U.S
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=916618 - 2025-02-19
[PDF]
Holly R. v. Joseph T.
and was not given a trial on the petition filed by his ex-wife. He also argues that after the trial judge set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2663 - 2017-09-19
and was not given a trial on the petition filed by his ex-wife. He also argues that after the trial judge set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2663 - 2017-09-19