Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 20921 - 20930 of 57970 for a i x.
Search results 20921 - 20930 of 57970 for a i x.
State v. Scott Elvers
. The maximum penalty I face upon conviction is: $10,000 fine, 3.5 years imprisonment[.]” Id., ¶9 (alteration
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19978 - 2005-10-18
. The maximum penalty I face upon conviction is: $10,000 fine, 3.5 years imprisonment[.]” Id., ¶9 (alteration
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19978 - 2005-10-18
State v. James L. Holloway
OF APPEALS DISTRICT I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8316 - 2005-03-31
OF APPEALS DISTRICT I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8316 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Deidra J.
809.62, STATS. No. 99-1193 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15481 - 2017-09-21
809.62, STATS. No. 99-1193 STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15481 - 2017-09-21
State v. William E. Draughon III
” under § 940.22(1)(i) was error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the matter for a new trial. Draughon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18636 - 2005-07-26
” under § 940.22(1)(i) was error. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the matter for a new trial. Draughon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18636 - 2005-07-26
[PDF]
State v. Emanuel G.
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I IN RE THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO KEDAR K
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18453 - 2017-09-21
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I IN RE THE TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS TO KEDAR K
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18453 - 2017-09-21
State v. Joseph J. H.
such as this. And I find the testimony of Austin credible. I observed him in the videotape very carefully. And I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6181 - 2005-03-31
such as this. And I find the testimony of Austin credible. I observed him in the videotape very carefully. And I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6181 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Julie Brown v. Physicians Insurance Co. of Wisconsin, Inc.
IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I JULIE BROWN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF GARY K
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13885 - 2014-09-15
IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT I JULIE BROWN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF GARY K
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13885 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a videotaped law enforcement interview of Seever. Upon hearing this, Seever’s counsel stated: “I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176947 - 2017-09-21
a videotaped law enforcement interview of Seever. Upon hearing this, Seever’s counsel stated: “I
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=176947 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Lawrence P. Hoffman
modified instruction to both parties. After hearing the instruction, Hoffman’s attorney stated: I had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7003 - 2017-09-20
modified instruction to both parties. After hearing the instruction, Hoffman’s attorney stated: I had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7003 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
during the stop at issue in this case, it was “[b]ecause I didn’t think that I was going to capture
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=491247 - 2022-03-08
during the stop at issue in this case, it was “[b]ecause I didn’t think that I was going to capture
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=491247 - 2022-03-08