Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 21091 - 21100 of 77024 for search which.
Search results 21091 - 21100 of 77024 for search which.
State v. Charles Patterson
is whether § 980.02(2)(a)2, which permits a prior juvenile delinquency adjudication to serve as the predicate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15488 - 2005-03-31
is whether § 980.02(2)(a)2, which permits a prior juvenile delinquency adjudication to serve as the predicate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15488 - 2005-03-31
State v. Christopher Holmes
, the plea meets that test is a question of constitutional fact which we review de novo. See State v. Van
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15451 - 2005-03-31
, the plea meets that test is a question of constitutional fact which we review de novo. See State v. Van
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15451 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Charles Patterson
person under the sexual predator law, ch. 980, STATS. The issue is whether § 980.02(2)(a)2, which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15488 - 2017-09-21
person under the sexual predator law, ch. 980, STATS. The issue is whether § 980.02(2)(a)2, which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15488 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
David Kosmo v. State
of Transportation for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and awarding costs for filing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10646 - 2017-09-20
of Transportation for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and awarding costs for filing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10646 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
. Robinson points to Wis. Stat. § 939.66(2) (2007-08),[2] which provides that a lesser-included offense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56620 - 2010-11-15
. Robinson points to Wis. Stat. § 939.66(2) (2007-08),[2] which provides that a lesser-included offense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56620 - 2010-11-15
CA Blank Order
count of third-degree sexual assault—which were based on his Alford pleas—violated his double jeopardy
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112201 - 2014-05-07
count of third-degree sexual assault—which were based on his Alford pleas—violated his double jeopardy
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112201 - 2014-05-07
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. The board adopted a resolution opposing the amendment, which was signed by the Town clerk. A copy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1078658 - 2026-02-18
. The board adopted a resolution opposing the amendment, which was signed by the Town clerk. A copy
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1078658 - 2026-02-18
COURT OF APPEALS
.” Notice of the motion was sent to Gerard, who filed a “motion to dismiss the motion” which was set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26615 - 2006-10-02
.” Notice of the motion was sent to Gerard, who filed a “motion to dismiss the motion” which was set
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26615 - 2006-10-02
[PDF]
State v. Tigerwolf Angelo Prey-Perez
the punishment to be imposed, which is a question of law. See State v. Mosley, 201 Wis.2d 36, 43-44, 547 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11728 - 2017-09-20
the punishment to be imposed, which is a question of law. See State v. Mosley, 201 Wis.2d 36, 43-44, 547 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11728 - 2017-09-20
Alan D. Eisenberg v. Circuit Court for Milwaukee County
because: (1) the intentional act for which Eisenberg was found in contempt was his purposeful retention
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13357 - 2005-03-31
because: (1) the intentional act for which Eisenberg was found in contempt was his purposeful retention
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13357 - 2005-03-31