Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 37861 - 37870 of 83278 for case search.
Search results 37861 - 37870 of 83278 for case search.
[PDF]
WI APP 48
2008 WI APP 48 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2007AP1048
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31857 - 2014-09-15
2008 WI APP 48 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2007AP1048
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31857 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
need not reach this issue. See State v. Castillo, 213 Wis. 2d 488, 492, 570 N.W.2d 44 (1997) (cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56222 - 2014-09-15
need not reach this issue. See State v. Castillo, 213 Wis. 2d 488, 492, 570 N.W.2d 44 (1997) (cases
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=56222 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Joshua Jenkins
. ¶9 The threshold issue in this case is whether, under the facts and circumstances, Jenkins had been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15367 - 2017-09-21
. ¶9 The threshold issue in this case is whether, under the facts and circumstances, Jenkins had been
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15367 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that a decision in this appeal will have any practical effect in this case, this court dismisses her appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1053715 - 2025-12-23
that a decision in this appeal will have any practical effect in this case, this court dismisses her appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1053715 - 2025-12-23
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
., ¶¶13-14 (concluding that a case was moot when the order appealed from was expired
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=844361 - 2024-09-04
., ¶¶13-14 (concluding that a case was moot when the order appealed from was expired
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=844361 - 2024-09-04
[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]
NOTICE
on Obriecht’s future ability to file cases as a sanction for filing a frivolous appeal. We agree the present
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31175 - 2014-09-15
on Obriecht’s future ability to file cases as a sanction for filing a frivolous appeal. We agree the present
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31175 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
convictions, one for robbery with use of force arising in Milwaukee County case No. 2005CF1059
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70794 - 2014-09-15
convictions, one for robbery with use of force arising in Milwaukee County case No. 2005CF1059
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70794 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
at 702. ¶4 When the case was returned, the circuit court asked the parties to brief arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49969 - 2010-05-17
at 702. ¶4 When the case was returned, the circuit court asked the parties to brief arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49969 - 2010-05-17
2010 WI APP 131
2010 WI App 131 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2009AP2784 Complete
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53084 - 2011-08-21
2010 WI App 131 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2009AP2784 Complete
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=53084 - 2011-08-21