Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1781 - 1790 of 12912 for prosecuting.
Search results 1781 - 1790 of 12912 for prosecuting.
State v. Dequelvin M. Douglas
. The prosecution’s theory was that this was an inter-gang dispute and that Douglas was tired of Bankhead’s leadership
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12005 - 2005-03-31
. The prosecution’s theory was that this was an inter-gang dispute and that Douglas was tired of Bankhead’s leadership
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12005 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Patrick L. M.
petition has prosecutive merit. See WIS. STAT. § 938.18(4)(a). If prosecutive merit is found, the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6130 - 2017-09-19
petition has prosecutive merit. See WIS. STAT. § 938.18(4)(a). If prosecutive merit is found, the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6130 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
NOTICE
, the prosecution acknowledged that a plea agreement had been reached by No. 2009AP880-CR 3 which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49877 - 2014-09-15
, the prosecution acknowledged that a plea agreement had been reached by No. 2009AP880-CR 3 which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49877 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael J. Lindholm
of a preliminary examination are: to prevent hasty, malicious, improvident, and oppressive prosecutions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15938 - 2017-09-21
of a preliminary examination are: to prevent hasty, malicious, improvident, and oppressive prosecutions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15938 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
court went on to deny Stokes’s vindictive-prosecution claim. ¶5 Stokes appealed, and we remanded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85767 - 2014-09-15
court went on to deny Stokes’s vindictive-prosecution claim. ¶5 Stokes appealed, and we remanded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85767 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael Washington
by the prosecution. He argues that under State v. Ludwig, 124 Wis.2d 600, 611, 369 N.W.2d 722, 727 (1985), counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8611 - 2017-09-19
by the prosecution. He argues that under State v. Ludwig, 124 Wis.2d 600, 611, 369 N.W.2d 722, 727 (1985), counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8611 - 2017-09-19
State v. Jonathan C. Segner
prosecution witness. We reject his arguments and affirm the judgment and order.[1] ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15355 - 2005-03-31
prosecution witness. We reject his arguments and affirm the judgment and order.[1] ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15355 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
different statutes in a single prosecution for ‘the same offense’ violates double jeopardy when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31303 - 2014-09-15
different statutes in a single prosecution for ‘the same offense’ violates double jeopardy when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31303 - 2014-09-15
State v. Michael J. Lindholm
prosecutions; to protect the person charged from open and public accusations of crime; to avoid both
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15938 - 2005-03-31
prosecutions; to protect the person charged from open and public accusations of crime; to avoid both
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15938 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Leslie J. Webster
of the body responsible for investigating and prosecuting cases involving attorney misconduct was changed
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17374 - 2017-09-21
of the body responsible for investigating and prosecuting cases involving attorney misconduct was changed
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17374 - 2017-09-21