Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1171 - 1180 of 68893 for he.
Search results 1171 - 1180 of 68893 for he.
[PDF]
State v. William H. Jones
. William H. Jones claims that he reasonably refused to allow police officers to test him for blood
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15086 - 2017-09-21
. William H. Jones claims that he reasonably refused to allow police officers to test him for blood
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15086 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Travis Tucker v. State of Wisconsin Division of Hearings
on certiorari review the decision of the Department of Corrections (DOC) revoking his parole. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15390 - 2017-09-21
on certiorari review the decision of the Department of Corrections (DOC) revoking his parole. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15390 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
-degree sexual assault contrary to WIS. STAT. § 940.225(3) (2007-08).1 After sentencing, he sought
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=37679 - 2014-09-15
-degree sexual assault contrary to WIS. STAT. § 940.225(3) (2007-08).1 After sentencing, he sought
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=37679 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
. § 940.225(3) (2007-08).[1] After sentencing, he sought to withdraw his plea because he did not understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37679 - 2009-07-21
. § 940.225(3) (2007-08).[1] After sentencing, he sought to withdraw his plea because he did not understand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=37679 - 2009-07-21
Travis Tucker v. State of Wisconsin Division of Hearings
of the Department of Corrections (DOC) revoking his parole. He argues on appeal that there was insufficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15390 - 2005-03-31
of the Department of Corrections (DOC) revoking his parole. He argues on appeal that there was insufficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15390 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
Carlson appeals a judgment of conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32625 - 2014-09-15
Carlson appeals a judgment of conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32625 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
to and was convicted of operating a vehicle while intoxicated (2nd offense). He did so after his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46226 - 2010-01-26
to and was convicted of operating a vehicle while intoxicated (2nd offense). He did so after his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=46226 - 2010-01-26
COURT OF APPEALS
of conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense. He argues the evidence was insufficient to show
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32625 - 2014-03-24
of conviction for operating while intoxicated, first offense. He argues the evidence was insufficient to show
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32625 - 2014-03-24
[PDF]
NOTICE
, as an habitual offender. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion to withdraw his plea. He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=58293 - 2014-09-15
, as an habitual offender. He also appeals an order denying his postconviction motion to withdraw his plea. He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=58293 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
to withdraw his plea.2 On appeal, Jackson asserts he should be allowed to withdraw his plea because: (1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=467423 - 2021-12-29
to withdraw his plea.2 On appeal, Jackson asserts he should be allowed to withdraw his plea because: (1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=467423 - 2021-12-29