Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 13261 - 13270 of 40205 for financial disclosure statement.
Search results 13261 - 13270 of 40205 for financial disclosure statement.
[PDF]
State v. Murle E. Perkins
testified that his statement regarding Judge Radcliffe was intended as a hypothetical to show that he had
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17535 - 2017-09-21
testified that his statement regarding Judge Radcliffe was intended as a hypothetical to show that he had
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17535 - 2017-09-21
State v. Murle E. Perkins
. The defendant also testified that his statement regarding Judge Radcliffe was intended as a hypothetical to show
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17535 - 2005-03-31
. The defendant also testified that his statement regarding Judge Radcliffe was intended as a hypothetical to show
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17535 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
was convicted, WIS. STAT. § 946.32(1)(a), does not apply to oral false statements because the prohibition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=156431 - 2017-09-21
was convicted, WIS. STAT. § 946.32(1)(a), does not apply to oral false statements because the prohibition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=156431 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the morning after the assaults. The prosecutor argued admissibility as a prior inconsistent statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69406 - 2014-09-15
the morning after the assaults. The prosecutor argued admissibility as a prior inconsistent statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69406 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
as a prior inconsistent statement or a recorded recollection and under the residual hearsay rule. Defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69406 - 2011-08-08
as a prior inconsistent statement or a recorded recollection and under the residual hearsay rule. Defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69406 - 2011-08-08
COURT OF APPEALS
that the victim’s statements were not credible because her answers to preliminary questions demonstrated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96349 - 2013-05-06
that the victim’s statements were not credible because her answers to preliminary questions demonstrated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96349 - 2013-05-06
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that the victim’s statements were not credible because her answers to preliminary questions demonstrated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96349 - 2014-09-15
that the victim’s statements were not credible because her answers to preliminary questions demonstrated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96349 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. George W. Hindsley
VERGERONT, J. The State of Wisconsin appeals from the order of the circuit court suppressing a statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15565 - 2017-09-21
VERGERONT, J. The State of Wisconsin appeals from the order of the circuit court suppressing a statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15565 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Daniel J. Voigt
discretion by allowing his estranged wife to make a statement at sentencing. Voigt also attempts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14761 - 2017-09-21
discretion by allowing his estranged wife to make a statement at sentencing. Voigt also attempts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14761 - 2017-09-21
State v. Daniel J. Voigt
erroneously exercised its discretion by allowing his estranged wife to make a statement at sentencing. Voigt
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14761 - 2005-03-31
erroneously exercised its discretion by allowing his estranged wife to make a statement at sentencing. Voigt
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14761 - 2005-03-31