Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23351 - 23360 of 28855 for W.
Search results 23351 - 23360 of 28855 for W.
[PDF]
NOTICE
” and that trial counsel “failed to subpoena Reed so that the 9 ounces [of cocaine] that w[ere] inside of his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=58303 - 2014-09-15
” and that trial counsel “failed to subpoena Reed so that the 9 ounces [of cocaine] that w[ere] inside of his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=58303 - 2014-09-15
State v. Jesse Liukonen
. We agree. ¶9 “[W]hether the State’s conduct constitutes a breach of a plea agreement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6576 - 2005-03-31
. We agree. ¶9 “[W]hether the State’s conduct constitutes a breach of a plea agreement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6576 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
WI APP 20
, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Roger W. Palek, Madison. Respondent ATTORNEYS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=106754 - 2017-09-21
, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Roger W. Palek, Madison. Respondent ATTORNEYS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=106754 - 2017-09-21
Dane County v. Kenneth R. McGrew
that Deputy Novotny’s radar testimony was false. ¶12 We agree with the County’s response: “[W]e
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6648 - 2005-03-31
that Deputy Novotny’s radar testimony was false. ¶12 We agree with the County’s response: “[W]e
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6648 - 2005-03-31
State v. Lee Terrence Presley
), which requires a defendant to file “a notice of intent to pursue postconviction … relief” “[w]ithin 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24830 - 2006-05-30
), which requires a defendant to file “a notice of intent to pursue postconviction … relief” “[w]ithin 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24830 - 2006-05-30
[PDF]
Milwaukee Police Association v. Arthur Jones
law by limiting its reach. See Schultz, 208 Wis. 2d at 578 (“[W]e must construe statutes to avoid
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14924 - 2017-09-21
law by limiting its reach. See Schultz, 208 Wis. 2d at 578 (“[W]e must construe statutes to avoid
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14924 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and occasion ‘with such certainty that nothing remains for judgment or discretion.’” Id. “[W]hile the safe
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=556762 - 2022-08-18
and occasion ‘with such certainty that nothing remains for judgment or discretion.’” Id. “[W]hile the safe
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=556762 - 2022-08-18
[PDF]
WI APP 32
. Under this rule, “‘[w]here a policy expressly insures against loss caused by one risk but excludes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=137950 - 2017-09-21
. Under this rule, “‘[w]here a policy expressly insures against loss caused by one risk but excludes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=137950 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. See State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303, 316, 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996) (stating that “[w]ithout facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=992742 - 2025-08-05
. See State v. Bentley, 201 Wis. 2d 303, 316, 548 N.W.2d 50 (1996) (stating that “[w]ithout facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=992742 - 2025-08-05
[PDF]
State v. Severan Laron Lee
(citing United States v. Pierre, 781 F.2d 329, 333 (2d Cir. 1986)). It may be employed “[w]hen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12923 - 2017-09-21
(citing United States v. Pierre, 781 F.2d 329, 333 (2d Cir. 1986)). It may be employed “[w]hen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12923 - 2017-09-21