Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 30841 - 30850 of 82382 for simple case.
Search results 30841 - 30850 of 82382 for simple case.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
dismissing Gladney’s case with prejudice. The order provided that, for the reasons set forth
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=470379 - 2022-01-11
dismissing Gladney’s case with prejudice. The order provided that, for the reasons set forth
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=470379 - 2022-01-11
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
conclude that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. We agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=635289 - 2023-03-21
conclude that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. We agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=635289 - 2023-03-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, 317 Wis. 2d 161, 765 N.W.2d 794. During the plea colloquy in this case, the court did not mention
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=123008 - 2014-10-08
, 317 Wis. 2d 161, 765 N.W.2d 794. During the plea colloquy in this case, the court did not mention
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=123008 - 2014-10-08
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
appeal. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=868951 - 2024-10-29
appeal. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=868951 - 2024-10-29
[PDF]
State v. Clayton T. Veldt
offense was void. We disagree and affirm the conviction. BACKGROUND ¶2 This case involves three
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5357 - 2017-09-19
offense was void. We disagree and affirm the conviction. BACKGROUND ¶2 This case involves three
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5357 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Johnny M. McAdoo
the penalty enhancers were properly applied in this case. We affirm in part and reverse in part. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24926 - 2017-09-21
the penalty enhancers were properly applied in this case. We affirm in part and reverse in part. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24926 - 2017-09-21
CA Blank Order
on parole eligibility as a factor in determining sentence in this case, and therefore, the defendant’s
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=126926 - 2014-11-05
on parole eligibility as a factor in determining sentence in this case, and therefore, the defendant’s
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=126926 - 2014-11-05
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
at No. 2022AP1770 2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=771849 - 2024-03-05
at No. 2022AP1770 2 conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=771849 - 2024-03-05
[PDF]
NOTICE
cooperative with everyone he had dealt with during the pendency of this case. ¶5 The court deemed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36053 - 2014-09-15
cooperative with everyone he had dealt with during the pendency of this case. ¶5 The court deemed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36053 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
address the merits of the case, we note that State Farm has challenged the timeliness of the appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28936 - 2007-05-07
address the merits of the case, we note that State Farm has challenged the timeliness of the appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28936 - 2007-05-07