Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 191 - 200 of 530 for ot.
Search results 191 - 200 of 530 for ot.
State v. Michael D. Sykes
Sykes if he had any identification. Sykes said, “[N]ot on him but he had it in his wallet.” He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6460 - 2005-03-31
Sykes if he had any identification. Sykes said, “[N]ot on him but he had it in his wallet.” He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6460 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
at trial “was [n]ot the weapon claimed to have been used” is essentially a contention that he must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50468 - 2010-05-26
at trial “was [n]ot the weapon claimed to have been used” is essentially a contention that he must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50468 - 2010-05-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
not be enforced under WIS. STAT. § 403.309 “because the original [n]ote was not produced.” This statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=697276 - 2023-08-29
not be enforced under WIS. STAT. § 403.309 “because the original [n]ote was not produced.” This statement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=697276 - 2023-08-29
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
argues that “[n]ot every person who has consumed alcoholic beverages is ‘under the influence,’” see WIS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245120 - 2019-08-13
argues that “[n]ot every person who has consumed alcoholic beverages is ‘under the influence,’” see WIS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=245120 - 2019-08-13
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
72, ¶8, 280 Wis. 2d 534, 696 N.W.2d 255. ¶11 However, “[n]ot all conduct that deviates from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=194816 - 2017-09-21
72, ¶8, 280 Wis. 2d 534, 696 N.W.2d 255. ¶11 However, “[n]ot all conduct that deviates from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=194816 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
7 Indeed, Joiner-El’s argument that the bat presented at trial “was [n]ot the weapon claimed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=50468 - 2014-09-15
7 Indeed, Joiner-El’s argument that the bat presented at trial “was [n]ot the weapon claimed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=50468 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was occurring, the child responded “[n]ot really.” Hoff argues that his trial counsel should have cross
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=173763 - 2017-09-21
was occurring, the child responded “[n]ot really.” Hoff argues that his trial counsel should have cross
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=173763 - 2017-09-21
2008 WI APP 98
1586 (8th ed. 2004). Black’s defines “invalid” as “[n]ot legally binding” or “[w]ithout basis in fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32747 - 2008-06-24
1586 (8th ed. 2004). Black’s defines “invalid” as “[n]ot legally binding” or “[w]ithout basis in fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32747 - 2008-06-24
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
]ot always on point.” By contrast, the court found Zilles’ testimony “clear to the point
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142472 - 2017-09-21
]ot always on point.” By contrast, the court found Zilles’ testimony “clear to the point
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142472 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
no indication whatsoever.” Defense counsel reiterated that he was “[n]ot prepared to deal with party
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193273 - 2017-09-21
no indication whatsoever.” Defense counsel reiterated that he was “[n]ot prepared to deal with party
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193273 - 2017-09-21