Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4681 - 4690 of 41580 for she.

State v. Scott H. Petersen
testified at the postconviction motion hearing that she did not request this jury instruction because she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12154 - 2005-03-31

Dane County Department of Human Services v. Dana E.
of parental rights against Dana alleged that she had failed to visit or communicate with her children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4247 - 2005-03-31

Dunn County v. Kelly D.
to preside over the cases. In the alternative, she argues that the ultimate disposition, placing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3127 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] NOTICE
of her parental rights to Dakota J. and Keegan J. As pertinent to this appeal, she claims that her
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=27179 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
against her on December 20, 2010. Although in her notice of appeal she does not reference the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72540 - 2011-10-24

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. Trial counsel testified that she reviewed the videotaped interviews of the victim and her sister
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=137275 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
appeals the denial of her postconviction motion, which sought resentencing. Because she has developed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=256016 - 2020-03-11

Dane County Department of Human Services v. Dana E.
of parental rights against Dana alleged that she had failed to visit or communicate with her children
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4246 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 21, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
rights to Dakota J. and Keegan J. As pertinent to this appeal, she claims that her admission
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27179 - 2006-11-20

Mark Cimbalnik v. Patricia Guy
an order and a judgment of eviction. She contends that the trial court improperly decided contested facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7379 - 2005-03-31