Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 29841 - 29850 of 63787 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 29841 - 29850 of 63787 for Motion for joint custody.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
purposes specified in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(3). Michael Nieman appeals an order denying his motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252785 - 2020-01-22
purposes specified in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(3). Michael Nieman appeals an order denying his motion
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252785 - 2020-01-22
State v. Erik J. Moore
entered against him and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He argues that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20243 - 2005-12-21
entered against him and the order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He argues that the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20243 - 2005-12-21
State v. Craig A. Felten
appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3917 - 2005-03-31
appeals from the judgment of conviction entered against him and the order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3917 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
postconviction motion to withdraw his no contest plea to kidnapping. Stevenson did not establish the existence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36403 - 2009-05-12
postconviction motion to withdraw his no contest plea to kidnapping. Stevenson did not establish the existence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36403 - 2009-05-12
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
court order denying his motion seeking to challenge deductions from his inmate trust account. Cuesta
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212526 - 2018-05-07
court order denying his motion seeking to challenge deductions from his inmate trust account. Cuesta
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212526 - 2018-05-07
State v. Verne J. Stark
U.S. 1 (1968). This court affirms the judgment denying Stark’s motion to suppress. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5781 - 2005-03-31
U.S. 1 (1968). This court affirms the judgment denying Stark’s motion to suppress. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5781 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
conclude that the motion is procedurally barred because we rejected the same resentencing and correlative
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52521 - 2010-07-26
conclude that the motion is procedurally barred because we rejected the same resentencing and correlative
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52521 - 2010-07-26
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. He also appeals an order denying his amended postconviction motion. Orth argues that he received
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=849066 - 2024-09-18
. He also appeals an order denying his amended postconviction motion. Orth argues that he received
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=849066 - 2024-09-18
COURT OF APPEALS
PER CURIAM. Warren Slocum, pro se, appeals an order denying a motion to reopen his challenge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112630 - 2014-05-19
PER CURIAM. Warren Slocum, pro se, appeals an order denying a motion to reopen his challenge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112630 - 2014-05-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
is not reviewable under WIS. STAT. § 971.31(10) because Dahl did not file a motion to suppress evidence obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1063218 - 2026-01-15
is not reviewable under WIS. STAT. § 971.31(10) because Dahl did not file a motion to suppress evidence obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1063218 - 2026-01-15