Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2781 - 2790 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 2781 - 2790 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
[PDF]
NOTICE
. § 948.07(1) (2003-04)1 and from an order denying his postconviction motion seeking a new trial. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32607 - 2014-09-15
. § 948.07(1) (2003-04)1 and from an order denying his postconviction motion seeking a new trial. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32607 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
WI App 23
a judgment of conviction and challenges the denial of his motion to suppress, asserting that police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=210365 - 2018-05-07
a judgment of conviction and challenges the denial of his motion to suppress, asserting that police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=210365 - 2018-05-07
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a trial and moved to suppress his custodial statement. The State’s response to the motion included a CD
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=360479 - 2021-04-27
a trial and moved to suppress his custodial statement. The State’s response to the motion included a CD
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=360479 - 2021-04-27
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and Kloppenburg, JJ. Chad Stites, pro se, appeals a circuit court order denying Stites’ motion for sentence
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=102156 - 2017-09-21
and Kloppenburg, JJ. Chad Stites, pro se, appeals a circuit court order denying Stites’ motion for sentence
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=102156 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
was not “in custody” within the meaning of Miranda, so no warnings were required. When reviewing a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980447 - 2025-07-08
was not “in custody” within the meaning of Miranda, so no warnings were required. When reviewing a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980447 - 2025-07-08
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
was not “in custody” within the meaning of Miranda, so no warnings were required. When reviewing a motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980447 - 2025-07-08
was not “in custody” within the meaning of Miranda, so no warnings were required. When reviewing a motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=980447 - 2025-07-08
Kathryn M. Leute v. Robert L. Leute
motion to dismiss a custody petition. Section 808.03(2), Stats.[1] The dispositive issue is whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8600 - 2005-03-31
motion to dismiss a custody petition. Section 808.03(2), Stats.[1] The dispositive issue is whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8600 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
denying his motion for sentence credit. He contends that the rule announced in State v. Magnuson, 2000
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98064 - 2014-09-15
denying his motion for sentence credit. He contends that the rule announced in State v. Magnuson, 2000
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98064 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Kathryn M. Leute v. Robert L. Leute
Kathryn Leute's petition for leave to appeal from an order denying her motion to dismiss a custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8600 - 2017-09-19
Kathryn Leute's petition for leave to appeal from an order denying her motion to dismiss a custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8600 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
WI APP 117
, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V. NEENAH JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=124725 - 2017-09-21
, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, V. NEENAH JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=124725 - 2017-09-21