Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 41681 - 41690 of 73716 for ha.
Search results 41681 - 41690 of 73716 for ha.
COURT OF APPEALS
that the defendant (1) has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to counsel, and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115773 - 2014-07-01
that the defendant (1) has knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the right to counsel, and (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=115773 - 2014-07-01
Tammy J. Kaufman v. Donald E. Postle
is a discretionary decision of the circuit court. Id. “The trial court has broad discretion when instructing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2612 - 2006-12-12
is a discretionary decision of the circuit court. Id. “The trial court has broad discretion when instructing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2612 - 2006-12-12
COURT OF APPEALS
Gordon has established a prima facie violation of statutory or other duties is a question of law that we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70084 - 2011-08-22
Gordon has established a prima facie violation of statutory or other duties is a question of law that we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70084 - 2011-08-22
WI App 71 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2011AP1529 Complete Title of...
no deference to the ALJ’s decision and apply de novo review.[2] DISCUSSION ¶7 The legislature has
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82279 - 2012-08-29
no deference to the ALJ’s decision and apply de novo review.[2] DISCUSSION ¶7 The legislature has
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82279 - 2012-08-29
Frontsheet
No appeal has been filed. The matter is submitted for this court's review pursuant to SCR 22.17(2).[1] We
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75003 - 2011-12-06
No appeal has been filed. The matter is submitted for this court's review pursuant to SCR 22.17(2).[1] We
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=75003 - 2011-12-06
COURT OF APPEALS
have to hold them to the fact that this has to be treated as a mortgage foreclosure case rather than
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33166 - 2008-06-23
have to hold them to the fact that this has to be treated as a mortgage foreclosure case rather than
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33166 - 2008-06-23
COURT OF APPEALS
of sentence, he has essentially two prongs to his argument. First, his sentence is effectively a life
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52538 - 2010-07-26
of sentence, he has essentially two prongs to his argument. First, his sentence is effectively a life
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52538 - 2010-07-26
COURT OF APPEALS
a substantive due process claim, the threshold inquiry is whether there has been a showing of a deprivation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50672 - 2010-06-07
a substantive due process claim, the threshold inquiry is whether there has been a showing of a deprivation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=50672 - 2010-06-07
COURT OF APPEALS
of the parole board, [the court] has the power to protect its own decree by modifying the sentence if a change
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59003 - 2011-01-18
of the parole board, [the court] has the power to protect its own decree by modifying the sentence if a change
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=59003 - 2011-01-18
[PDF]
State v. James Arnold
a substantial factor in its sentencing decision. We conclude that Arnold has not demonstrated that the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6723 - 2017-09-20
a substantial factor in its sentencing decision. We conclude that Arnold has not demonstrated that the court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6723 - 2017-09-20