Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 30451 - 30460 of 34545 for in n.

[PDF] NOTICE
v. Brown, 2004 WI App 179, ¶7 n.3, 276 Wis. 2d 559, 687 N.W.2d 543; see also Santos, 136 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30745 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
, ¶9 n.8, 387 Wis. 2d 333, 929 N.W.2d 140 (citation omitted). No. 2020AP1351 3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=317998 - 2020-12-23

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. We disagree. “[A]n individual [facing recommitment] may still be dangerous despite the absence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=548180 - 2022-07-27

COURT OF APPEALS
. Hubbard, 2008 WI 92, ¶6 n.3, 313 Wis. 2d 1, 752 N.W.2d 839. ¶18 Hammake was capable of testifying
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=95104 - 2013-04-08

[PDF] State v. Michael J. Whipp
. Grayson, 172 Wis.2d 156, 159 n.3, 493 N.W.2d 23, 25 (1992). There are no double jeopardy problems
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12537 - 2017-09-21

State v. James B. Williams
resulted in a resentencing by a different judge. Consequently, any ineffectiveness o[n] the part of trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5785 - 2005-03-31

State v. Carlos Santiago
). [4] Indeed, while we recognize that “[i]n our diverse and pluralistic society, the importance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7862 - 2005-03-31

State v. Bradley S. Whitman
is a defense tactic or merely indifference. Id. at 512 n.9. As a result, because Whitman did not timely
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5033 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
circumstances existed. See State v. Subdiaz-Osorio, 2014 WI 87, ¶10 n.4, 357 Wis. 2d 41, 849 N.W.2d 748
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=446382 - 2021-10-26

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
of the appropriate legal standard to the relevant facts of the case. Hedtcke v. Sentry Ins. Co., 109 Wis. 2d 461
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=138607 - 2017-09-21