Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3581 - 3590 of 90880 for w a v e.
Search results 3581 - 3590 of 90880 for w a v e.
[PDF]
State v. Joseph A. Lombard
, assistant attorney general, and James E. Doyle, attorney general. There was oral argument by Eileen W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3361 - 2017-09-19
, assistant attorney general, and James E. Doyle, attorney general. There was oral argument by Eileen W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3361 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Terry A. Doxtator
, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. TERRY A. DOXTATOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3870 - 2017-09-20
, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. TERRY A. DOXTATOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3870 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Richard A. Nuchell
-RESPONDENT, V. RICHARD A. NUCHELL, DEFENDANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14000 - 2014-09-15
-RESPONDENT, V. RICHARD A. NUCHELL, DEFENDANT
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14000 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Danny A. Reynolds
at felony judges’ meetings, [“W]e impose and stay[ sentences.] We shouldn’t withhold.[”] But I think
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3641 - 2017-09-19
at felony judges’ meetings, [“W]e impose and stay[ sentences.] We shouldn’t withhold.[”] But I think
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3641 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Joshua A. Propst
IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT IV STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. JOSHUA
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14188 - 2014-09-15
IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT IV STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. JOSHUA
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14188 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael A. Grindemann
said: [W]e perceive no valid reason why a trial court should not be permitted to review a sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3657 - 2017-09-19
said: [W]e perceive no valid reason why a trial court should not be permitted to review a sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3657 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Patricia A. Weed
(1997). In explaining the benefits of requiring a colloquy, we stated in Klessig, [W]e mandate
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16514 - 2017-09-21
(1997). In explaining the benefits of requiring a colloquy, we stated in Klessig, [W]e mandate
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16514 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Florian A. Kress
DISTRICT II STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. FLORIAN
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3622 - 2017-09-19
DISTRICT II STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. FLORIAN
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3622 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Greggory A. Brown
IV STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. GREGGORY
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19774 - 2017-09-21
IV STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. GREGGORY
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19774 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Ray A. Schiller
A. SCHILLER: STATE OF WISCONSIN, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, V. RAY
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3901 - 2017-09-20
A. SCHILLER: STATE OF WISCONSIN, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, V. RAY
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3901 - 2017-09-20

