Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 36821 - 36830 of 83001 for case codes/1000.
Search results 36821 - 36830 of 83001 for case codes/1000.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. No. 2009AP3080-CR 3 ¶4 Trial counsel’s sentencing argument highlighted “positives” in Patterson’s case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63727 - 2014-09-15
. No. 2009AP3080-CR 3 ¶4 Trial counsel’s sentencing argument highlighted “positives” in Patterson’s case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=63727 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Brandy Albert Essex
in this case violates § 973.15(2)(a) because it could run consecutive to future sentences. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7393 - 2017-09-20
in this case violates § 973.15(2)(a) because it could run consecutive to future sentences. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7393 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
C & B Investments v. Wisconsin Winnebago Health Department
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7705 - 2017-09-19
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7705 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
County Circuit Court Case No. 2015CF1666. Mallett entered into a plea agreement with the State
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219680 - 2018-09-20
County Circuit Court Case No. 2015CF1666. Mallett entered into a plea agreement with the State
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=219680 - 2018-09-20
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Lynn Morrissey
2005 WI 2 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 04-1869-D COMPLETE TITLE
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16836 - 2017-09-21
2005 WI 2 SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN CASE NO.: 04-1869-D COMPLETE TITLE
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=16836 - 2017-09-21
State v. Ernest J.P., Jr.
has misinterpreted the statute, which does not purport to dictate how the county must prove its case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7128 - 2005-03-31
has misinterpreted the statute, which does not purport to dictate how the county must prove its case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7128 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
and Sherman, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a worker’s compensation case that presents the issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=55769 - 2005-03-31
and Sherman, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. This is a worker’s compensation case that presents the issues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=55769 - 2005-03-31
Frontsheet
2012 WI 18 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 2011AP2326-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=78956 - 2012-02-29
2012 WI 18 Supreme Court of Wisconsin Case No.: 2011AP2326-D Complete Title
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=78956 - 2012-02-29
COURT OF APPEALS
and that pertaining to the remaining count; and (3) the strength of the case on the remaining count. Id. at 379-80. ¶9
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86696 - 2012-09-04
and that pertaining to the remaining count; and (3) the strength of the case on the remaining count. Id. at 379-80. ¶9
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86696 - 2012-09-04
Date: June 6, 2006 To: Clerk of Court of Appeals From: District 4 Opinions for Release On June 8, ...
, 2006 Opinion Case Number Short Caption CountyName 2005AP000105 CR State v. Thomas G. Kramer Adams
/ca/mitl/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25461 - 2006-06-05
, 2006 Opinion Case Number Short Caption CountyName 2005AP000105 CR State v. Thomas G. Kramer Adams
/ca/mitl/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25461 - 2006-06-05