Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1991 - 2000 of 13648 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Fortress Double Door Wlingi Blitar.
Search results 1991 - 2000 of 13648 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Fortress Double Door Wlingi Blitar.
[PDF]
2017 OWI Guidelines District 7
(On & After 06-01-2017) 12 – 18 Months (doubles under (§343.30(1q)(b)4m)), plus number of days of jail
/publications/fees/docs/d7owi2017.pdf - 2017-07-21
(On & After 06-01-2017) 12 – 18 Months (doubles under (§343.30(1q)(b)4m)), plus number of days of jail
/publications/fees/docs/d7owi2017.pdf - 2017-07-21
[PDF]
2015 OWI Guidelines District 7
(§346.65(7))] REVOCATION: 12 – 18 Months (doubles under (§343.30(1q)(b)4m)), plus number of days of jail
/publications/fees/docs/d7owi2015.pdf - 2015-09-02
(§346.65(7))] REVOCATION: 12 – 18 Months (doubles under (§343.30(1q)(b)4m)), plus number of days of jail
/publications/fees/docs/d7owi2015.pdf - 2015-09-02
COURT OF APPEALS
to support the verdict; and (8) Jackson’s prosecution violated his right to be free from double jeopardy. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69079 - 2011-08-03
to support the verdict; and (8) Jackson’s prosecution violated his right to be free from double jeopardy. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=69079 - 2011-08-03
Shirley A. Smedema v. Milwaukee Guardian Insurance Company
settlement for $165,000, she is entitled to pre-judgment interest and double costs under Rule 807.01
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10562 - 2005-03-31
settlement for $165,000, she is entitled to pre-judgment interest and double costs under Rule 807.01
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10562 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a final judgment against him of $19,445 in compensatory damages, double No. 2025AP1734 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1145648 - 2026-07-15
a final judgment against him of $19,445 in compensatory damages, double No. 2025AP1734 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1145648 - 2026-07-15
COURT OF APPEALS
. See Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155 (1978). As will be seen, law enforcement checked and double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85239 - 2012-07-24
. See Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154, 155 (1978). As will be seen, law enforcement checked and double
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85239 - 2012-07-24
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the original conduct report on procedural grounds violated double jeopardy. However, the initial conduct
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=160963 - 2017-09-21
of the original conduct report on procedural grounds violated double jeopardy. However, the initial conduct
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=160963 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Shirley A. Smedema v. Milwaukee Guardian Insurance Company
and double costs under RULE 807.01, and ordinary costs under RULES 814.01 & 814.04, STATS. No. 96
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10562 - 2017-09-20
and double costs under RULE 807.01, and ordinary costs under RULES 814.01 & 814.04, STATS. No. 96
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10562 - 2017-09-20
Mark Lattimore v. Caldon Rushing
to pay him double damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys fees for violating an administrative rule
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24572 - 2006-03-22
to pay him double damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys fees for violating an administrative rule
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24572 - 2006-03-22
Vicky L. Stellflue v. Lloyd C. Stellflue
to have double-counted some assets, we affirm the judgment in part, reverse it in part, and remand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10707 - 2005-03-31
to have double-counted some assets, we affirm the judgment in part, reverse it in part, and remand
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10707 - 2005-03-31