Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23491 - 23500 of 38484 for t's.
Search results 23491 - 23500 of 38484 for t's.
COURT OF APPEALS
was explicitly rejected in Greenwold II, 189 Wis. 2d at 68-69 (“[T]here is no bad faith when the police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34358 - 2008-10-20
was explicitly rejected in Greenwold II, 189 Wis. 2d at 68-69 (“[T]here is no bad faith when the police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34358 - 2008-10-20
COURT OF APPEALS
determination is part of the court’s exercise of sentencing discretion. See Wis. Stat. § 973.01(3g) (“[T]he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100621 - 2013-08-13
determination is part of the court’s exercise of sentencing discretion. See Wis. Stat. § 973.01(3g) (“[T]he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100621 - 2013-08-13
COURT OF APPEALS
the investigator’s conclusion that “[t]he allegations could not be substantiated at this point.” An unsubstantiated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53163 - 2010-08-09
the investigator’s conclusion that “[t]he allegations could not be substantiated at this point.” An unsubstantiated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53163 - 2010-08-09
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
court stated: [T]he evidence was that the fingerprint was taken from the white chair beneath
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197352 - 2017-10-04
court stated: [T]he evidence was that the fingerprint was taken from the white chair beneath
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=197352 - 2017-10-04
COURT OF APPEALS
to modify custody and primary physical placement based on Sandberg’s alleged anger issues. He argues, “[t
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86547 - 2012-08-29
to modify custody and primary physical placement based on Sandberg’s alleged anger issues. He argues, “[t
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86547 - 2012-08-29
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
been introduced into evidence as Exhibit 1, “[t]o piece together a chain of events
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1053778 - 2025-12-23
been introduced into evidence as Exhibit 1, “[t]o piece together a chain of events
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1053778 - 2025-12-23
COURT OF APPEALS
. Ultimately, the court held: [T]he presence and availability for cross-examination of a highly qualified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117121 - 2014-07-14
. Ultimately, the court held: [T]he presence and availability for cross-examination of a highly qualified
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117121 - 2014-07-14
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that Jones’s suppression motion was heard and decided by the Honorable T. Christopher Dee. Jones’s motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=701293 - 2023-09-12
that Jones’s suppression motion was heard and decided by the Honorable T. Christopher Dee. Jones’s motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=701293 - 2023-09-12
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. Sheila T. Reiff Clerk of Court of Appeals
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=531414 - 2022-06-15
. Sheila T. Reiff Clerk of Court of Appeals
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=531414 - 2022-06-15
COURT OF APPEALS
misconstrued the fifth, “[t]he desirability of trial and disposition of the entire offense in one court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87593 - 2012-10-02
misconstrued the fifth, “[t]he desirability of trial and disposition of the entire offense in one court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87593 - 2012-10-02