Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35381 - 35390 of 63601 for records.
Search results 35381 - 35390 of 63601 for records.
Harry Bruce Pomeroy v. Jennifer Ann Pomeroy
decision based on the application of the correct legal standards to the facts of record. Id. ¶5
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26289 - 2006-08-23
decision based on the application of the correct legal standards to the facts of record. Id. ¶5
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26289 - 2006-08-23
COURT OF APPEALS
to the no-merit report. We conducted an independent review of the record, as required by Anders v. California
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35937 - 2009-03-23
to the no-merit report. We conducted an independent review of the record, as required by Anders v. California
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35937 - 2009-03-23
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=625928 - 2023-02-23
Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=625928 - 2023-02-23
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1011166 - 2025-09-16
our review of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1011166 - 2025-09-16
State v. Robert J. DeFliger
this issue at the postconviction hearing, and thus he failed to make a record of trial counsel’s testimony
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2934 - 2005-03-31
this issue at the postconviction hearing, and thus he failed to make a record of trial counsel’s testimony
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2934 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
were void because they (1) violated Wisconsin’s open meetings and public records laws, (2) violated UW
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31966 - 2008-02-27
were void because they (1) violated Wisconsin’s open meetings and public records laws, (2) violated UW
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31966 - 2008-02-27
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was significantly compromised by the remote appearance. However, the record and Schultz’s own admissions in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=850856 - 2024-09-18
was significantly compromised by the remote appearance. However, the record and Schultz’s own admissions in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=850856 - 2024-09-18
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
for reconsideration. 1 Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=208831 - 2018-02-21
for reconsideration. 1 Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=208831 - 2018-02-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
off the record, and the prosecutor continued with his closing argument. After the court instructed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=80927 - 2014-09-15
off the record, and the prosecutor continued with his closing argument. After the court instructed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=80927 - 2014-09-15
CA Blank Order
responded. Upon this court’s independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, counsel’s report
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103477 - 2013-10-22
responded. Upon this court’s independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, counsel’s report
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103477 - 2013-10-22