Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 39751 - 39760 of 84001 for simple case search.
Search results 39751 - 39760 of 84001 for simple case search.
State v. Mark H. Price
or her impartiality. See id. In this case, however, the trial judge determined that he was impartial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10367 - 2005-03-31
or her impartiality. See id. In this case, however, the trial judge determined that he was impartial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10367 - 2005-03-31
State v. Ray A. Hampton
to a plea agreement, he had pled guilty to armed robbery for his participation in the case. Hampton
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11484 - 2005-03-31
to a plea agreement, he had pled guilty to armed robbery for his participation in the case. Hampton
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11484 - 2005-03-31
State v. Saul R. Lopez
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8091 - 2005-03-31
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8091 - 2005-03-31
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
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and summarily affirm. Nos. 2012AP2221-CRNM, 2012AP2222-CRNM 2 A criminal complaint in case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100154 - 2017-09-21
and summarily affirm. Nos. 2012AP2221-CRNM, 2012AP2222-CRNM 2 A criminal complaint in case
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=100154 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Henry A. Phillips
convictions. This court concludes No. 98-1056-CR 2 that under the circumstances in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13887 - 2014-09-15
convictions. This court concludes No. 98-1056-CR 2 that under the circumstances in this case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13887 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
cases that were handled together pursuant to a joint plea agreement. We affirm for the reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30817 - 2014-09-15
cases that were handled together pursuant to a joint plea agreement. We affirm for the reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30817 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Rudy A. Wendt
and affirm the judgment. The State’s case against Wendt was based on allegations that, while subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13020 - 2017-09-21
and affirm the judgment. The State’s case against Wendt was based on allegations that, while subject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13020 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
with use of force arising in Milwaukee County case No. 2005CF1059, and the other for escape arising
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70794 - 2011-09-12
with use of force arising in Milwaukee County case No. 2005CF1059, and the other for escape arising
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70794 - 2011-09-12
[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