Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3611 - 3620 of 6141 for sheriff.
Search results 3611 - 3620 of 6141 for sheriff.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, the sheriff’s deputy who initiated the traffic stop on Immel testified as follows. On a September morning
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1062911 - 2026-01-21
, the sheriff’s deputy who initiated the traffic stop on Immel testified as follows. On a September morning
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1062911 - 2026-01-21
COURT OF APPEALS
County Sheriff’s Department and the City of Sheboygan Police Department were involved. “Police” refers
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116711 - 2014-07-15
County Sheriff’s Department and the City of Sheboygan Police Department were involved. “Police” refers
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=116711 - 2014-07-15
Margaret Lamkin v. St. Croix County
out that the sheriffs for whom she worked testified extensively regarding her employment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10088 - 2005-03-31
out that the sheriffs for whom she worked testified extensively regarding her employment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10088 - 2005-03-31
Village of Waterford v. Kurt J. Doerr
that once he invoked his right to counsel, the sheriff’s deputies were bound by the constitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13708 - 2005-03-31
that once he invoked his right to counsel, the sheriff’s deputies were bound by the constitution
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13708 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Betsy H.
of investigation by the Fond du Lac County Sheriff’s Department and after the boyfriend spent a weekend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3174 - 2017-09-19
of investigation by the Fond du Lac County Sheriff’s Department and after the boyfriend spent a weekend
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3174 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
requirements. Accordingly, I affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 A Waupaca County Sheriff’s Department deputy pulled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=572371 - 2022-09-29
requirements. Accordingly, I affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 A Waupaca County Sheriff’s Department deputy pulled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=572371 - 2022-09-29
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
explained below, I affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the sheriff’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103152 - 2017-09-21
explained below, I affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the sheriff’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103152 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
of Deerfield. A witness identified Nelson to Officer Robby Vick of the Dane County Sheriff’s Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34524 - 2014-09-15
of Deerfield. A witness identified Nelson to Officer Robby Vick of the Dane County Sheriff’s Department
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34524 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the sheriff’s department sergeant who stopped Troka’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103152 - 2013-10-16
The sole witness at the suppression hearing was the sheriff’s department sergeant who stopped Troka’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103152 - 2013-10-16
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
. RULE 809.21 (2017-18).1 We affirm. On January 6, 2018, Winnebago County Sheriff’s Deputy Russ
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252861 - 2020-01-29
. RULE 809.21 (2017-18).1 We affirm. On January 6, 2018, Winnebago County Sheriff’s Deputy Russ
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252861 - 2020-01-29