Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 36571 - 36580 of 69426 for as he.

[PDF] State v. Theodore L. Briggs
consistently asserted at trial, as he does on appeal, that §§ 943.395(1) and (2), STATS., require the State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12087 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Famous Cases of the Wisconsin Supreme Court - State v. Mitchell
tennis shoes. He spent four days in a coma and possibly suffered permanent brain damage. Mitchell
/courts/supreme/docs/famouscases20.pdf - 2009-11-17

State v. Dennis E. Jones
Correctional Institution, where Jones is an inmate, received an anonymous tip that he would soon be receiving
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12203 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] David E. Meiers v. Frederick W. Bennett
eventually bought the business for $575,000 and now contends that he is not obligated to pay the commission
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12112 - 2017-09-21

State v. Antonio Herrera, Jr.
homicide, armed robbery and burglary while armed as a party to the crimes. He argues that the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3644 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] CA Blank Order
for postconviction relief pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 974.06. In it, he argued that the circuit court lacked subject
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=140608 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
that he exposed his genitals to a child contrary to Wis. Stat. § 948.10(1). He contends the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31960 - 2008-02-27

[PDF] State v. Joseph Van Beek
and further evidence was gathered. ¶5 Van Beek moved to suppress the evidence. He claimed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3581 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Jason L. Wendler
the “Informing the Accused” form in compliance with WIS. STAT. § 343.305(4). He submitted to an evidentiary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5739 - 2017-09-19

Karen Wisemiller v. Kenneth Wisemiller
actually received more than half of the marital property. He contends that the court incorrectly concluded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16229 - 2005-03-31