Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 33941 - 33950 of 63789 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 33941 - 33950 of 63789 for Motion for joint custody.
John M. Baker v.
appeal and to seek resentencing of the client by filing a postconviction motion within 20 days
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17250 - 2005-03-31
appeal and to seek resentencing of the client by filing a postconviction motion within 20 days
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17250 - 2005-03-31
State v. Miguel A. Segarra
contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine that was discovered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6828 - 2005-03-31
contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress the cocaine that was discovered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6828 - 2005-03-31
Tina Gouty-Yellow v. Francis Yellow
child support payments to his ex-wife, Tina Gouty-Yellow, in response to a motion by the State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3463 - 2005-03-31
child support payments to his ex-wife, Tina Gouty-Yellow, in response to a motion by the State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3463 - 2005-03-31
State v. Charles Jones
the order denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. He argues: (1) his conviction was obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16139 - 2005-03-31
the order denying his postconviction motion for a new trial. He argues: (1) his conviction was obtained
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16139 - 2005-03-31
Legend Diamonds, Inc. v. Diamond Cutters of Milwaukee
motion because the discovery had not been responded to and dispositive facts were admitted by the failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4511 - 2005-03-31
motion because the discovery had not been responded to and dispositive facts were admitted by the failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4511 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Colleen Lemmer
and from the evidence presented at the hearing on Lemmer’s motion to suppress.3 The trial court wrote
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16046 - 2017-09-21
and from the evidence presented at the hearing on Lemmer’s motion to suppress.3 The trial court wrote
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16046 - 2017-09-21
State v. Eric C. Abrams
claims that the trial court improperly (1) denied his motion to suppress his saliva, blood and hair test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10633 - 2005-03-31
claims that the trial court improperly (1) denied his motion to suppress his saliva, blood and hair test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10633 - 2005-03-31
State v. Enrique Vizcaino
of the initial stop.” Id., ¶24. On review of the circuit court’s ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25988 - 2006-07-25
of the initial stop.” Id., ¶24. On review of the circuit court’s ruling on a motion to suppress evidence, we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25988 - 2006-07-25
State v. Daniel C. Krause
, as a second offense, pursuant to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats., and from an order denying his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14532 - 2005-03-31
, as a second offense, pursuant to § 346.63(1)(a), Stats., and from an order denying his motion to suppress
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14532 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
his suppression motion. Stegall was adjudicated guilty of operating while intoxicated as a first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141241 - 2015-05-04
his suppression motion. Stegall was adjudicated guilty of operating while intoxicated as a first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=141241 - 2015-05-04