Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34181 - 34190 of 39159 for c's.
Search results 34181 - 34190 of 39159 for c's.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
as calculated under s. 304.06 (1). (c) The person is not eligible for parole. This paragraph applies only
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=164167 - 2017-09-21
as calculated under s. 304.06 (1). (c) The person is not eligible for parole. This paragraph applies only
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=164167 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
omitted; first set of ellipses in Carter). “[C]ounsel’s performance need not be perfect, nor even very
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206797 - 2018-01-17
omitted; first set of ellipses in Carter). “[C]ounsel’s performance need not be perfect, nor even very
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206797 - 2018-01-17
State v. Luther Wade Cofield
Laurence C. Gram, Jr., sentenced Cofield to a fifty-year prison term on one count of sexual assault
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5877 - 2005-03-31
Laurence C. Gram, Jr., sentenced Cofield to a fifty-year prison term on one count of sexual assault
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5877 - 2005-03-31
State v. George Stone
was presented with the issue, and we cannot substitute our judgment for that of the jury. C. Rape Shield
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14830 - 2005-03-31
was presented with the issue, and we cannot substitute our judgment for that of the jury. C. Rape Shield
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14830 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
sentence, “a reasonable person c[ould] interpret these statements as the court’s reiteration of the maximum
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100617 - 2013-08-12
sentence, “a reasonable person c[ould] interpret these statements as the court’s reiteration of the maximum
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=100617 - 2013-08-12
[PDF]
State v. Chad A. Pritchard
to 4 A “[c]rime considered at sentencing” is the crime of conviction, as well as any crime read
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2373 - 2017-09-19
to 4 A “[c]rime considered at sentencing” is the crime of conviction, as well as any crime read
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2373 - 2017-09-19
Malcolm Stack v. Kelly Joesten
. Before Eich, C.J., and Paul C. Gartzke and Robert D. Sundby, Reserve Judges. PER
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8614 - 2005-03-31
. Before Eich, C.J., and Paul C. Gartzke and Robert D. Sundby, Reserve Judges. PER
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8614 - 2005-03-31
Denise Currie v. State of Wisconsin Department of Industry
of James E. Doyle, attorney general, and David C. Rice, assistant attorney general. COURT OF APPEALS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10967 - 2005-03-31
of James E. Doyle, attorney general, and David C. Rice, assistant attorney general. COURT OF APPEALS
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10967 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
was not a boarding school. Victor B. and Sean C. were students at the school in the mid to late 1960’s. Both Victor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36478 - 2009-05-19
was not a boarding school. Victor B. and Sean C. were students at the school in the mid to late 1960’s. Both Victor
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36478 - 2009-05-19
WI APP 78 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2012AP823-CR Complete Title ...
with prejudice, see § 976.05(5)(c)—the penalty should not be imposed unless it is clear that the State was aware
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97268 - 2013-06-25
with prejudice, see § 976.05(5)(c)—the penalty should not be imposed unless it is clear that the State was aware
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97268 - 2013-06-25