Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31651 - 31660 of 59033 for do.

2007 WI APP 159
as so defined.” ¶17 Finally and most significantly, some provisions in 24 C.F.R. § 966 and § 982 do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29178 - 2013-12-25

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. The supreme court reasoned: “A defendant must do more than merely allege that he would have pled differently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=165254 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Douglas M. Weed v. Steven P. Anderson
not file a cross-appellant's brief, we do not separately address the cross-appeal. NO. 96-2623
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11412 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] NOTICE
the attorney did, or did not do, and the basis for the challenged conduct are factual and will be upheld
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35646 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] CA Blank Order
was testifying because he hoped that by doing so he would “receive less time, get back home.” He then told
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=770901 - 2024-03-05

[PDF] NOTICE
to talk to Dubis without a representative, he was ordered to do so by a Milwaukee police sergeant who
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=29838 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] WI APP 118
¶11 The parties do not dispute that the terms of the plea agreement stated at the final
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=36880 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
cross-examination of Misty, much less prejudicial. First of all, we do not see any point in Misty’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29876 - 2007-08-01

[PDF] State v. Harlan Schwartz
and requires more scrutiny. Even assuming it would qualify as a golden rule argument, we do not believe
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4846 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
failure to do so. ¶25 Notwithstanding the above, even if Butler had demonstrated that his counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=632176 - 2023-03-14