Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 16981 - 16990 of 69114 for he.
Search results 16981 - 16990 of 69114 for he.
[PDF]
State v. Bruce M. Saks
on whether the sentences should be imposed concurrently or consecutively. He points to the prosecutor’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12890 - 2017-09-21
on whether the sentences should be imposed concurrently or consecutively. He points to the prosecutor’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12890 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
motion to modify his sentence.[1] He argues that new factors warrant modification. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99875 - 2013-08-20
motion to modify his sentence.[1] He argues that new factors warrant modification. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=99875 - 2013-08-20
State v. Tyren E. Black
from a judgment entered after he pled no contest to one count of felon in possession of a firearm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15046 - 2005-03-31
from a judgment entered after he pled no contest to one count of felon in possession of a firearm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15046 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was convicted, pursuant to a plea agreement, of felon in possession of a firearm and felony bail jumping. He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=784982 - 2024-04-04
was convicted, pursuant to a plea agreement, of felon in possession of a firearm and felony bail jumping. He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=784982 - 2024-04-04
[PDF]
Sheboygan County DSS v. Matthew S.
counsel’s ineffectiveness by questioning counsel about why he never objected that one of the conditions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7439 - 2017-09-20
counsel’s ineffectiveness by questioning counsel about why he never objected that one of the conditions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7439 - 2017-09-20
Sheboygan County DSS v. Matthew S.
by questioning counsel about why he never objected that one of the conditions violated Matthew’s Miranda[2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7439 - 2005-03-31
by questioning counsel about why he never objected that one of the conditions violated Matthew’s Miranda[2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7439 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. RULE 809.32. Rainer was advised of his right to file a response, and he has responded. Upon
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=120833 - 2014-09-15
. RULE 809.32. Rainer was advised of his right to file a response, and he has responded. Upon
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=120833 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Mark M. Loutsch
requiring that he pay restitution in the amount of $33,167.44; he also appeals the order denying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5432 - 2017-09-19
requiring that he pay restitution in the amount of $33,167.44; he also appeals the order denying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5432 - 2017-09-19
State v. Mark M. Loutsch
of conviction and an order requiring that he pay restitution in the amount of $33,167.44; he also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5432 - 2005-03-31
of conviction and an order requiring that he pay restitution in the amount of $33,167.44; he also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5432 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
days according to § 801.15(5)(a) if the appellant notifies the clerk’s office that he or she received
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45782 - 2014-09-15
days according to § 801.15(5)(a) if the appellant notifies the clerk’s office that he or she received
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45782 - 2014-09-15