Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 28471 - 28480 of 82997 for case codes/1000.
Search results 28471 - 28480 of 82997 for case codes/1000.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. We affirm the order
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170444 - 2017-09-21
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. We affirm the order
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=170444 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
on the solicitation to intimidate the victim’s parents. On the State’s motion, this case was joined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32441 - 2014-09-15
on the solicitation to intimidate the victim’s parents. On the State’s motion, this case was joined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32441 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. James E. Goodman
with respect to whether restitution should be permitted in this case. After reviewing the briefs, the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25089 - 2017-09-21
with respect to whether restitution should be permitted in this case. After reviewing the briefs, the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25089 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
confidentiality, we use pseudonyms for the child and parent in this case. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.86(1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1020740 - 2025-10-14
confidentiality, we use pseudonyms for the child and parent in this case. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.86(1
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1020740 - 2025-10-14
State v. Derick D. Bostick
involving Bostick. Both incidents were strikingly similar to the facts alleged against Bostick in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10569 - 2005-03-31
involving Bostick. Both incidents were strikingly similar to the facts alleged against Bostick in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10569 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Kyle J. Nelson
and PBT results, was the odor of intoxicant emanating from his vehicle. He argues that other cases have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18180 - 2017-09-21
and PBT results, was the odor of intoxicant emanating from his vehicle. He argues that other cases have
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18180 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
. § 973.15(2) (1979-80) prohibits his sentences in this case from running consecutive to an earlier sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48910 - 2010-04-12
. § 973.15(2) (1979-80) prohibits his sentences in this case from running consecutive to an earlier sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48910 - 2010-04-12
[PDF]
State v. Richard J. Wooster
, we conclude that the enactment of Chapter 980 does not constitute a new factor in this case. B
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8229 - 2017-09-19
, we conclude that the enactment of Chapter 980 does not constitute a new factor in this case. B
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8229 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Rose Marie Hartfield
factors and exercised discretion in applying those factors to the facts of this case, we affirm. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25063 - 2017-09-21
factors and exercised discretion in applying those factors to the facts of this case, we affirm. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=25063 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Delbert L. Manke
his request for copies of transcripts and other documents pertaining to his criminal cases under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9398 - 2017-09-19
his request for copies of transcripts and other documents pertaining to his criminal cases under
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9398 - 2017-09-19