Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23111 - 23120 of 59254 for SMALL CLAIMS.
Search results 23111 - 23120 of 59254 for SMALL CLAIMS.
[PDF]
NOTICE
in three ways not originally discussed in his first Machner hearing. He claimed trial counsel failed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34566 - 2014-09-15
in three ways not originally discussed in his first Machner hearing. He claimed trial counsel failed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34566 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
.” Specifically, Tiggs claimed his original sentence structure was an “unconstitutional application
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105642 - 2017-09-21
.” Specifically, Tiggs claimed his original sentence structure was an “unconstitutional application
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105642 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Kirk moved for resentencing, claiming that she had been denied the effective assistance of counsel
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=123862 - 2017-09-21
Kirk moved for resentencing, claiming that she had been denied the effective assistance of counsel
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=123862 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Richard L. Harris
postconviction motion. NOS. 96-1233-CR 96-1234-CR 97-1428-CR 97-1429-CR 2 Harris claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12491 - 2017-09-21
postconviction motion. NOS. 96-1233-CR 96-1234-CR 97-1428-CR 97-1429-CR 2 Harris claims
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12491 - 2017-09-21
State v. Robert A. Huppeler
subsequent order denying his postconviction motion to modify his sentence. Huppeler claims that he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14235 - 2005-03-31
subsequent order denying his postconviction motion to modify his sentence. Huppeler claims that he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14235 - 2005-03-31
John W. Fritsch v. Premier Investors, LLC
claims were properly rejected on summary judgment. See Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). ¶14 Finally
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25193 - 2006-05-22
claims were properly rejected on summary judgment. See Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2). ¶14 Finally
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25193 - 2006-05-22
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
reception area. The circuit court rejected this claim on the following grounds: the parties negotiated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=233640 - 2019-01-30
reception area. The circuit court rejected this claim on the following grounds: the parties negotiated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=233640 - 2019-01-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
claims that by failing to file a suppression motion on these bases, his counsel performed deficiently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=832315 - 2024-07-31
claims that by failing to file a suppression motion on these bases, his counsel performed deficiently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=832315 - 2024-07-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
also claims he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel. We reject these arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=143653 - 2017-09-21
also claims he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel. We reject these arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=143653 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
discussed in his first Machner hearing. He claimed trial counsel failed to: pursue exculpatory footprint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34566 - 2008-11-11
discussed in his first Machner hearing. He claimed trial counsel failed to: pursue exculpatory footprint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34566 - 2008-11-11