Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 451 - 460 of 13652 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Fortress Double Door Wlingi Blitar.
Search results 451 - 460 of 13652 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Fortress Double Door Wlingi Blitar.
[PDF]
State v. Jose M. Aldazabal
denying his motion for postconviction relief. The issue is whether Aldazabal's double jeopardy rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8356 - 2017-09-19
denying his motion for postconviction relief. The issue is whether Aldazabal's double jeopardy rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8356 - 2017-09-19
State v. Jose M. Aldazabal
double jeopardy rights were violated when he was convicted of delivery of cocaine within 1,000 feet
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8356 - 2014-09-15
double jeopardy rights were violated when he was convicted of delivery of cocaine within 1,000 feet
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8356 - 2014-09-15
State v. Frank James Burt, Jr.
relief. Burt argues that the trial court violated the double jeopardy clauses of the state and federal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15489 - 2005-03-31
relief. Burt argues that the trial court violated the double jeopardy clauses of the state and federal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15489 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Paul D. Shegonee
not intentionally subvert Shegonee’s protection against double 1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6760 - 2017-09-20
not intentionally subvert Shegonee’s protection against double 1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6760 - 2017-09-20
State v. Paul D. Shegonee
] concluding the State did not intentionally subvert Shegonee’s protection against double jeopardy. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6760 - 2005-03-31
] concluding the State did not intentionally subvert Shegonee’s protection against double jeopardy. He argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6760 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
8th Judicial Administrative PAC Sentencing Guidelines
: Suspension for 6 months. Four (4) points on driving record, assuming not subject to doubling. §346.63
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2022.pdf - 2023-02-20
: Suspension for 6 months. Four (4) points on driving record, assuming not subject to doubling. §346.63
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2022.pdf - 2023-02-20
[PDF]
2023 OWI Guidelines - District 8
to doubling. §346.63(2m) Immediately eligible for occupational license under §343.10. §343.305(10
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2023.pdf - 2024-02-09
to doubling. §346.63(2m) Immediately eligible for occupational license under §343.10. §343.305(10
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2023.pdf - 2024-02-09
[PDF]
2024 OWI Guidelines District 8
, assuming not subject to doubling. §346.63(2m) Immediately eligible for occupational license under
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2024.pdf - 2024-04-23
, assuming not subject to doubling. §346.63(2m) Immediately eligible for occupational license under
/publications/fees/docs/d8owi2024.pdf - 2024-04-23
Village of Port Edwards v. Greg D. Terry
against double jeopardy because he had already been punished for the offense when the police held him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15452 - 2005-03-31
against double jeopardy because he had already been punished for the offense when the police held him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15452 - 2005-03-31
State v. Brad A. Raddeman
prosecution of both offenses on due process and double jeopardy grounds. The trial court agreed with Raddeman
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2157 - 2005-03-31
prosecution of both offenses on due process and double jeopardy grounds. The trial court agreed with Raddeman
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2157 - 2005-03-31