Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20321 - 20330 of 65135 for or b.
Search results 20321 - 20330 of 65135 for or b.
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
in the [circuit] court,” as required by WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(1)(b) and (d). While Kottwitz’s brief contains
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1051072 - 2025-12-17
in the [circuit] court,” as required by WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(1)(b) and (d). While Kottwitz’s brief contains
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1051072 - 2025-12-17
State v. Salaam P. Johnson
to sustain his burden that his lineup was impermissibly suggestive. B. Alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9317 - 2005-03-31
to sustain his burden that his lineup was impermissibly suggestive. B. Alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9317 - 2005-03-31
State v. Larry A. Clairmore
, that some kind of criminal activity was taking place. B. Probable Cause for Arrest ¶10
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4010 - 2005-03-31
, that some kind of criminal activity was taking place. B. Probable Cause for Arrest ¶10
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4010 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
was prejudicial. State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 633, 369 N.W.2d 711 (1985). “[B]oth the performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142619 - 2015-06-02
was prejudicial. State v. Pitsch, 124 Wis. 2d 628, 633, 369 N.W.2d 711 (1985). “[B]oth the performance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=142619 - 2015-06-02
COURT OF APPEALS
intentional homicide if a person uses unnecessary defensive force. See Wis. Stat. § 940.01(2)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117569 - 2014-07-21
intentional homicide if a person uses unnecessary defensive force. See Wis. Stat. § 940.01(2)(b
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117569 - 2014-07-21
State v. Daniel P. Moen
. It was reasonable for the jury to infer from these facts that he was operating the vehicle. B. Defense Motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
. It was reasonable for the jury to infer from these facts that he was operating the vehicle. B. Defense Motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
explanation is for both the stop and the arrest. He testified, “[b]ecause I have had prior contact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30155 - 2007-09-04
explanation is for both the stop and the arrest. He testified, “[b]ecause I have had prior contact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30155 - 2007-09-04
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
brief conforms to WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(8)(b)3.c., but the body is written in 11-point, rather than
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170358 - 2017-09-21
brief conforms to WIS. STAT. RULE 809.19(8)(b)3.c., but the body is written in 11-point, rather than
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170358 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
COUNTY, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, V. ROBERT C. B., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27399 - 2014-09-15
COUNTY, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, V. ROBERT C. B., RESPONDENT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27399 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
employer’s medical reimbursement plan, see WIS. STAT. § 804.01(5)(b), Shelly’s failure to do so did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48250 - 2014-09-15
employer’s medical reimbursement plan, see WIS. STAT. § 804.01(5)(b), Shelly’s failure to do so did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48250 - 2014-09-15