Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 2921 - 2930 of 19311 for transfer by affidavit.
Search results 2921 - 2930 of 19311 for transfer by affidavit.
State v. Jack P. Lindgren
. ¶8 The detectives prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6669 - 2005-03-31
. ¶8 The detectives prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6669 - 2005-03-31
State v. Jack P. Lindgren
warrants. ¶8 The detectives prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6668 - 2005-03-31
warrants. ¶8 The detectives prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6668 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Jack P. Lindgren
prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car, and business. A Kenosha county
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6668 - 2017-09-20
prepared an affidavit for a search warrant for Lindgren’s home, car, and business. A Kenosha county
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6668 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
. Nolen, who was not a witness at the trial, and Jamison both executed affidavits in support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85628 - 2012-07-30
. Nolen, who was not a witness at the trial, and Jamison both executed affidavits in support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=85628 - 2012-07-30
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was not a witness at the trial, and Jamison both executed affidavits in support of the postconviction motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85628 - 2014-09-15
was not a witness at the trial, and Jamison both executed affidavits in support of the postconviction motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=85628 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
his motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant because the affidavit in support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60850 - 2011-03-07
his motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant because the affidavit in support
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60850 - 2011-03-07
[PDF]
State v. Edward A. Stoetzel
. The dispositive issues are (1) whether the search warrant affidavit contained a false statement made
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10830 - 2017-09-20
. The dispositive issues are (1) whether the search warrant affidavit contained a false statement made
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10830 - 2017-09-20
State v. Edward A. Stoetzel
motion to suppress that evidence. The dispositive issues are (1) whether the search warrant affidavit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10830 - 2005-03-31
motion to suppress that evidence. The dispositive issues are (1) whether the search warrant affidavit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10830 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
the affidavit in support of the warrant failed to establish probable cause that contraband would be found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60850 - 2014-09-15
the affidavit in support of the warrant failed to establish probable cause that contraband would be found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60850 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Fun-World 2, L.L.C. v. Joseph Konopka
erroneously disregarded the affidavit of Fun-World’s owner, Samuel Graham, as a “sham” affidavit; (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5815 - 2017-09-19
erroneously disregarded the affidavit of Fun-World’s owner, Samuel Graham, as a “sham” affidavit; (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5815 - 2017-09-19