Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 12741 - 12750 of 73010 for we.
Search results 12741 - 12750 of 73010 for we.
[PDF]
State v. Mark Sevelin
was in "custody" at the treatment center. See § 973.155(1)(a), STATS.2 We conclude that (1) Sevelin can
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10531 - 2017-09-20
was in "custody" at the treatment center. See § 973.155(1)(a), STATS.2 We conclude that (1) Sevelin can
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10531 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
NOTICE
marijuana pursuant to a medical authorization signed by a California medical doctor. We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49183 - 2014-09-15
marijuana pursuant to a medical authorization signed by a California medical doctor. We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49183 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that we have reached a decision on these No. 2018AP114 2 same facts. In this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218962 - 2018-09-12
that we have reached a decision on these No. 2018AP114 2 same facts. In this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218962 - 2018-09-12
[PDF]
State v. Patrick W. Kenney
its discretion on the evidentiary issue or in sentencing, we affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 On September
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3763 - 2017-09-19
its discretion on the evidentiary issue or in sentencing, we affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 On September
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3763 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of counsel. We agree with the circuit court that Davis’s postconviction motion did not warrant a hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206653 - 2018-01-10
of counsel. We agree with the circuit court that Davis’s postconviction motion did not warrant a hearing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206653 - 2018-01-10
[PDF]
State v. Brian K. Goodson
breached the plea agreement. We conclude that the prosecutor’s comments at the sentencing hearing were
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18832 - 2017-09-21
breached the plea agreement. We conclude that the prosecutor’s comments at the sentencing hearing were
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18832 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
Trett from this appeal. We question whether we have jurisdiction to consider Hendricks’ claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=538913 - 2022-06-29
Trett from this appeal. We question whether we have jurisdiction to consider Hendricks’ claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=538913 - 2022-06-29
[PDF]
WI APP 8
the content of the interview to the circuit court.2 We reverse because the circuit court lacks
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44903 - 2014-09-15
the content of the interview to the circuit court.2 We reverse because the circuit court lacks
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44903 - 2014-09-15
State v. Jose Nieves-Gonzalez
Amendment. We agree and conclude that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2895 - 2005-03-31
Amendment. We agree and conclude that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2895 - 2005-03-31
State v. Cheryl A. Koenig
“dating” renders the condition unconstitutionally vague. We disagree. We conclude that the statutory
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5183 - 2006-08-07
“dating” renders the condition unconstitutionally vague. We disagree. We conclude that the statutory
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5183 - 2006-08-07