Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 3771 - 3780 of 63732 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 3771 - 3780 of 63732 for Motion for joint custody.
WI App 52 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2012AP1275-CR Complete Title...
and Douglas testified at the evidentiary hearing on Douglas’s motion to suppress. ¶5 Although
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94202 - 2013-04-23
and Douglas testified at the evidentiary hearing on Douglas’s motion to suppress. ¶5 Although
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94202 - 2013-04-23
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
filed the previous § 974.06 motions, he was in custody in Arizona as opposed to Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218915 - 2018-09-19
filed the previous § 974.06 motions, he was in custody in Arizona as opposed to Wisconsin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218915 - 2018-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an order denying their motion for reconsideration. The Cardinals contend that the circuit court applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=948751 - 2025-04-29
an order denying their motion for reconsideration. The Cardinals contend that the circuit court applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=948751 - 2025-04-29
[PDF]
NOTICE
the sentencing objectives (“minimum custody requirements”). The trial court denied the motion, explaining
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48451 - 2014-09-15
the sentencing objectives (“minimum custody requirements”). The trial court denied the motion, explaining
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48451 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
(“minimum custody requirements”). The trial court denied the motion, explaining the specific mitigating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48451 - 2010-03-29
(“minimum custody requirements”). The trial court denied the motion, explaining the specific mitigating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=48451 - 2010-03-29
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED October 19, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of A...
to joint legal custody and shared physical placement of their two minor daughters. They stipulated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26855 - 2006-10-18
to joint legal custody and shared physical placement of their two minor daughters. They stipulated
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26855 - 2006-10-18
[PDF]
NOTICE
and state income taxes. ¶7 In April 2003, Keith and Jolene were divorced. The parties agreed to joint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26855 - 2014-09-15
and state income taxes. ¶7 In April 2003, Keith and Jolene were divorced. The parties agreed to joint
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26855 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
of cocaine as party to a crime. Hallet argues the trial court erroneously denied his pretrial motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49114 - 2010-04-19
of cocaine as party to a crime. Hallet argues the trial court erroneously denied his pretrial motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49114 - 2010-04-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was not in custody for purposes of Miranda during either interrogation. Legal Standards ¶7 We review motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=280749 - 2020-08-20
was not in custody for purposes of Miranda during either interrogation. Legal Standards ¶7 We review motions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=280749 - 2020-08-20
[PDF]
WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT
that an individual has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody or detention, held for investigation
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=841424 - 2024-08-20
that an individual has been questioned, apprehended, taken into custody or detention, held for investigation
/sc/sccase/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=841424 - 2024-08-20