Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 21561 - 21570 of 64166 for records.
Search results 21561 - 21570 of 64166 for records.
COURT OF APPEALS
or unjustifiable basis in the record for the sentence at issue. See State v. Lechner, 217 Wis. 2d 392, 418, 576
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70535 - 2011-09-06
or unjustifiable basis in the record for the sentence at issue. See State v. Lechner, 217 Wis. 2d 392, 418, 576
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70535 - 2011-09-06
State v. Barbara J. Anderson
modification. The record reveals that when it imposed sentence on June 8, 2000, the trial court’s primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4336 - 2005-03-31
modification. The record reveals that when it imposed sentence on June 8, 2000, the trial court’s primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4336 - 2005-03-31
Edward Pryzina v. City of Thorp
, the trial court affirmed based on the record of the administrative proceeding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10079 - 2005-03-31
, the trial court affirmed based on the record of the administrative proceeding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10079 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
consideration of the no-merit report and our independent review of the record, we conclude that the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=270034 - 2020-07-22
consideration of the no-merit report and our independent review of the record, we conclude that the judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=270034 - 2020-07-22
State v. Jerome M. Nelligan
. Nelligan claims this finding was clearly erroneous. Because the record supports the trial court’s finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12696 - 2005-03-31
. Nelligan claims this finding was clearly erroneous. Because the record supports the trial court’s finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12696 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Kohl's Foods Store v. Labor and Industry Review Commission
but to affirm LIRC’s decision if the record contains credible and substantial evidence that support LIRC’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10883 - 2017-09-20
but to affirm LIRC’s decision if the record contains credible and substantial evidence that support LIRC’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10883 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Mai Lee Vue
a response. Vue has not done so. This court has conducted the independent review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8798 - 2017-09-19
a response. Vue has not done so. This court has conducted the independent review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8798 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Toni P. Cayton
aimed at the correction of “an error of fact not appearing on the record.” Jessen, 95 Wis. 2d at 213
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3867 - 2017-09-20
aimed at the correction of “an error of fact not appearing on the record.” Jessen, 95 Wis. 2d at 213
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3867 - 2017-09-20
State v. Jason Frederick Work
was unduly harsh. Upon our independent review of the record, and upon our review of the no merit report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14554 - 2005-03-31
was unduly harsh. Upon our independent review of the record, and upon our review of the no merit report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14554 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
2 review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we conclude there is no arguable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1001485 - 2025-08-27
2 review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we conclude there is no arguable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1001485 - 2025-08-27