Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35361 - 35370 of 58828 for do.

COURT OF APPEALS
are waiving; do you understand that? After accepting Miller’s no contest plea, the circuit court sentenced him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135542 - 2015-02-23

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED April 11, 2007 David R. Schanker Clerk of Court of App...
to provide accused drivers with specific information.” Id. An officer does not have a duty to explain or do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28665 - 2007-04-10

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
testimony denying the allegations was “the only non-hearsay account of what Sellers was actually doing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=800811 - 2024-05-14

COURT OF APPEALS
-to hearsay is admissible as substantive evidence). ¶11 These events, Lawver contends, do not constitute
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=63594 - 2011-05-04

[PDF] State v. Jerome L. Dancer
be eligible for W-2, employment positions, or child care until I do so [or] for six months, whichever
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5440 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Robert W. Huber
closed and to secure it. As he was doing that, he bumped into a chair and pictures of underage girls
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6043 - 2017-09-19

State v. John C. Thorstad
facts the parties do not contest. Thorstad was arrested on September 27, 1997, at the scene of a one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15717 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] City of New Berlin v. Dennis Barker
to the facts. However, neither party requested the circuit court to do so. Therefore, the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6138 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] Converse and Lovina Smith v. Wisconsin Institute for Torah Study, Inc.
are an accessory use to a school in a single-family residential district. The parties do not dispute
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11552 - 2017-09-19

State v. Michael J. Cauley
them from doing so. The supreme court denied both the motion to withdraw the no merit report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9637 - 2005-03-31