Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 45591 - 45600 of 74812 for public records.
Search results 45591 - 45600 of 74812 for public records.
[PDF]
NOTICE
that are not part of the record. We do not consider assertions of fact that are not part of the record. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31013 - 2014-09-15
that are not part of the record. We do not consider assertions of fact that are not part of the record. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31013 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
procedures were in fact followed, and the record demonstrates a sufficient degree of confidence in the result
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33151 - 2008-06-23
procedures were in fact followed, and the record demonstrates a sufficient degree of confidence in the result
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33151 - 2008-06-23
[PDF]
State v. Hans Gerger
, the circuit court found that the State had not breached the plea agreement. Our review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13995 - 2014-09-15
, the circuit court found that the State had not breached the plea agreement. Our review of the record
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13995 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we summarily affirm the judgments
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=399784 - 2021-07-28
and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders and RULE 809.32, we summarily affirm the judgments
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=399784 - 2021-07-28
COURT OF APPEALS
conviction was not supported by credible evidence. We review the record to determine whether the court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30813 - 2007-11-07
conviction was not supported by credible evidence. We review the record to determine whether the court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30813 - 2007-11-07
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
our review of Vander Heiden’s brief and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=578131 - 2022-10-18
our review of Vander Heiden’s brief and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=578131 - 2022-10-18
[PDF]
NOTICE
not explicitly consider all of the Kruzycki factors. We disagree. The record shows that the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28258 - 2014-09-15
not explicitly consider all of the Kruzycki factors. We disagree. The record shows that the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28258 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
enhancers pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 939.62(1) (2019-20).2 Based upon our review of the briefs and record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=542903 - 2022-07-13
enhancers pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 939.62(1) (2019-20).2 Based upon our review of the briefs and record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=542903 - 2022-07-13
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
an independent review of the records, the no-merit report, and Kaitlynn’s response, this court concludes
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1041524 - 2025-11-25
an independent review of the records, the no-merit report, and Kaitlynn’s response, this court concludes
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1041524 - 2025-11-25
CA Blank Order
, but has not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111940 - 2014-05-05
, but has not filed a response. Upon reviewing the entire record, as well as the no-merit report, we agree
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111940 - 2014-05-05