Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20441 - 20450 of 83965 for case search.
Search results 20441 - 20450 of 83965 for case search.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. No. 2015AP1196-CR 3 surcharge in 2001 on a felony drug case. All of Howard’s requests were denied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=163180 - 2017-09-21
. No. 2015AP1196-CR 3 surcharge in 2001 on a felony drug case. All of Howard’s requests were denied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=163180 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 12, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
.” Spaeth, 206 Wis. 2d at 155-156 (footnote in original). ¶4 Wideman and Spaeth, cases involving two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27380 - 2006-12-11
.” Spaeth, 206 Wis. 2d at 155-156 (footnote in original). ¶4 Wideman and Spaeth, cases involving two
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27380 - 2006-12-11
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).1 We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1076014 - 2026-02-10
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2023-24).1 We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1076014 - 2026-02-10
[PDF]
State v. Mark J. Modory
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10304 - 2017-09-20
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10304 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Michael G. Kachelski
testified. Trial counsel testified that he did not treat Kachelski’s case any different than any other
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12449 - 2017-09-21
testified. Trial counsel testified that he did not treat Kachelski’s case any different than any other
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12449 - 2017-09-21
State v. Michael B. Ilkka
County if it could be arranged. On December 30, in an unrelated case, Ilkka was convicted of fourth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16175 - 2005-03-31
County if it could be arranged. On December 30, in an unrelated case, Ilkka was convicted of fourth
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16175 - 2005-03-31
Milwaukee County v. Anna B.
in ordering protective placement because the facts of each case do not support such an order; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8169 - 2005-03-31
in ordering protective placement because the facts of each case do not support such an order; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8169 - 2005-03-31
Milwaukee County v. Earlie W.
in ordering protective placement because the facts of each case do not support such an order; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8278 - 2005-03-31
in ordering protective placement because the facts of each case do not support such an order; and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8278 - 2005-03-31
State v. Thomas Guzman
of expert testimony on "battered women's syndrome" in this battery case. The State sought admission
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9749 - 2005-03-31
of expert testimony on "battered women's syndrome" in this battery case. The State sought admission
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9749 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Michael B. Ilkka
affirm. 1 This case is decided
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16175 - 2017-09-21
affirm. 1 This case is decided
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16175 - 2017-09-21