Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 46141 - 46150 of 82664 for case codes/1000.

State v. Bryan S. Campbell
; (7) certain testimony violated Campbell’s plea agreement in a previous case; (8) the testimony
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2358 - 2005-03-31

State v. Louis Elizondo, Jr.
through the full colloquy required by the cases, and certainly made no attempt to give [him] an awareness
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10169 - 2005-03-31

Mary Aiello v. Village of Pleasant Prairie
PUBLISHED OPINION Case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9061 - 2005-03-31

State v. Keith A. Glass
identification requires a case-by-case application of the rule to the particular facts of each case….” Powell
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4323 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] CA Blank Order
and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for No. 2023AP1318-CR 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=804505 - 2024-05-22

[PDF] Allan B. Levin v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System
2003 WI App 181 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 02-2278
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5597 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] CA Blank Order
A companion case against Whiteside (Milwaukee County Circuit Court Case No. 2014CF3028) was tried
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=174597 - 2017-09-21

State v. Stephen S.
did, and his TPR case was tried before a jury. The jury unanimously found
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11009 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
exists when, under the totality of the circumstances, “the facts of the case would warrant a reasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=108799 - 2014-03-10

State v. Steven Claus
. In Claus’ case, there is no dispute that Friedrich advised Claus of the implied consent law using
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13858 - 2005-03-31