Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12031 - 12040 of 50122 for our.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. Jacob T., our supreme court held that WIS. STAT. § 48.415(6) calls for fact finders to consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=67803 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
was in error. We need not address whether the circuit court applied the proper standard because our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115245 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] NOTICE
to describe any connection between the decision in Shepard and his own sentencing hearing. Our review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48903 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
and onerously complicated our review in this case. The rules of appellate practice are designed in part
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97423 - 2013-05-28

[PDF] State v. Darwin J. Pamanet
require less corroboration than others. We need not address this issue based on our conclusion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13604 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] CA Blank Order
under which it found N.W. to be dangerous, as required by our supreme court in Langlade Cnty. v. D.J.W
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=579958 - 2022-10-20

State v. Patrick A. Saunders
(1993), our supreme court held that there was no statutory right to presence by a defendant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8053 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
, not the circuit court or this court. Id., ¶58. Our job is only to determine whether there is “some evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207913 - 2018-02-01

[PDF] NOTICE
Wis. 2d 721, ¶26. A reasonable probability is one that undermines our confidence in the outcome
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35560 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. William J. Kubacki
. We begin our analysis by reviewing the evidence. The arresting officer testified as follows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11703 - 2017-09-20