Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15571 - 15580 of 65135 for or b.
Search results 15571 - 15580 of 65135 for or b.
State v. Wade L.
the jurisdiction of the court ... shall be conducted according to this subsection. .... (b) A copy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9106 - 2014-01-13
the jurisdiction of the court ... shall be conducted according to this subsection. .... (b) A copy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9106 - 2014-01-13
State v. Dawn Dobbs
statement at trial. B. Sufficiency of the Evidence. Dobbs also claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9101 - 2014-01-13
statement at trial. B. Sufficiency of the Evidence. Dobbs also claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9101 - 2014-01-13
City of Fort Atkinson v. Ronald A. Lendabarker
. Lendabarker was charged with two counts of violating city ordinance 20.01, which adopted § 346.63(1)(a) and (b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10501 - 2005-03-31
. Lendabarker was charged with two counts of violating city ordinance 20.01, which adopted § 346.63(1)(a) and (b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10501 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
court for Milwaukee County: MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Judge. Affirmed. Before Higginbotham, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35365 - 2014-09-15
court for Milwaukee County: MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Judge. Affirmed. Before Higginbotham, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35365 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Jerald J. McDowell
substance with intent to deliver, as a subsequent offense, contrary to §§ 161.16(2)(b)1, 161.41(1m)(cm)1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10604 - 2017-09-20
substance with intent to deliver, as a subsequent offense, contrary to §§ 161.16(2)(b)1, 161.41(1m)(cm)1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10604 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
there 1 The Roops’ reply brief fails to conform to the rules contained in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(8)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178522 - 2017-09-21
there 1 The Roops’ reply brief fails to conform to the rules contained in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(8)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=178522 - 2017-09-21
City of Menomonie v. Jeno D. Herman
vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 346.63(1)(a) and 346.63(1)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4189 - 2005-03-31
vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration, contrary to Wis. Stat. §§ 346.63(1)(a) and 346.63(1)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4189 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
with a prohibited alcohol concentration, § 346.63(1)(b). ¶5 At trial, the arresting officer testified about
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91641 - 2013-01-15
with a prohibited alcohol concentration, § 346.63(1)(b). ¶5 At trial, the arresting officer testified about
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=91641 - 2013-01-15
State v. James W. Knipfer
statements are not hearsay. See Wis. Stat. § 908.01(4)(b)1. Although testimony about Geraldine’s statements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25261 - 2006-05-24
statements are not hearsay. See Wis. Stat. § 908.01(4)(b)1. Although testimony about Geraldine’s statements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25261 - 2006-05-24
Waushara County v. Clinton L. Duhm
to Wis. Stat. § 345.51 is that found in Wis. Stat. § 345.37(1)(b), whether the defendant “shows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4530 - 2005-03-31
to Wis. Stat. § 345.51 is that found in Wis. Stat. § 345.37(1)(b), whether the defendant “shows
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4530 - 2005-03-31