Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 16871 - 16880 of 86229 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) 2 Daun Pintu Rumah Pameungpeuk Garut.

COURT OF APPEALS
. Stat. § 802.05 (2007-08)[1] sanctions. We affirm. ¶2 Brill prepared Fears’ personal tax returns
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=41678 - 2009-10-06

State v. Linda Lacey
violated; (2) the trial court erred by sentencing her without making a finding of extended supervision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6992 - 2005-03-31

Ray A. Peterson v. Teresa E. Tucker
City of Madison ordinances cannot “override” state law. ¶2 We conclude that the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4125 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
affirm the dismissal order. BACKGROUND ¶2 On February 9, 2007, Richardson’s then-spouse, Mariana
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=45677 - 2007-12-03

[PDF] Frontsheet
, C.J., GABLEMAN, J., and KELLY, J., (joins footnote 2) (opinion filed). DISSENTED: A.W. BRADLEY, J
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=215235 - 2018-08-27



Frontsheet
trial. ¶2 Jackson's petition for review presents the narrow question of whether a defendant
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107126 - 2014-08-11

COURT OF APPEALS
that: (1) his trial lawyer was ineffective; (2) he is entitled to a new trial under the plain-error
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35413 - 2009-02-02

[PDF] Appeal No. 2007AP1403-CR Cir. Ct. No. 2005CF222
. No. 2007AP1403-CR 2 properly interpret WIS. STAT. § 973.20 with respect to the setting of restitution
/ca/cert/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33154 - 2014-09-15