Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 28611 - 28620 of 38503 for ph d.
Search results 28611 - 28620 of 38503 for ph d.
CA Blank Order
felony. The trial court stated that the bargained-for amendment to a Class D felony was appropriate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94285 - 2013-03-19
felony. The trial court stated that the bargained-for amendment to a Class D felony was appropriate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94285 - 2013-03-19
State v. Alvin Braden
for Milwaukee County: jacqueline d. schellinger, Judge. Affirmed. Before Wedemeyer, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4731 - 2005-03-31
for Milwaukee County: jacqueline d. schellinger, Judge. Affirmed. Before Wedemeyer, P.J
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4731 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Randy Houle v. School District of Ashland
. v. Trust Ins. Plan, 884 F. Supp. 1360 (D. Alaska 1994), the court examined the legislative history
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6018 - 2017-09-19
. v. Trust Ins. Plan, 884 F. Supp. 1360 (D. Alaska 1994), the court examined the legislative history
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6018 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Mary Krueger
a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Polk County: EUGENE D. HARRINGTON, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17982 - 2017-09-21
a judgment and an order of the circuit court for Polk County: EUGENE D. HARRINGTON, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17982 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Eric J.D.
with respect to both the suppression motion and the fact finding. The court, stating that it “d[id]n’t need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13048 - 2017-09-21
with respect to both the suppression motion and the fact finding. The court, stating that it “d[id]n’t need
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13048 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(d) (2011-12). All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135210 - 2017-09-21
1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(d) (2011-12). All
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=135210 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
and convincing evidence. WIS. STAT. § 55.10(4)(d). ¶7 Randall does not dispute the age element
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=266925 - 2020-07-07
and convincing evidence. WIS. STAT. § 55.10(4)(d). ¶7 Randall does not dispute the age element
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=266925 - 2020-07-07
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
: [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: [D]oes anyone else have that concern that, you know, in a serious case if you thought
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193647 - 2017-09-21
: [DEFENSE COUNSEL]: [D]oes anyone else have that concern that, you know, in a serious case if you thought
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193647 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. MICHAEL D. DEMARS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=291437 - 2020-09-29
, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. MICHAEL D. DEMARS, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=291437 - 2020-09-29
[PDF]
State v. Thomas F. W.
1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(d) (1999- 2000
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3292 - 2017-09-19
1 This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 752.31(2)(d) (1999- 2000
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3292 - 2017-09-19