Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 4731 - 4740 of 12799 for se.
Search results 4731 - 4740 of 12799 for se.
[PDF]
NOTICE
the judgment of conviction. On February 3, 2006, Daniels, acting pro se, filed a “motion for postconviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28489 - 2014-09-15
the judgment of conviction. On February 3, 2006, Daniels, acting pro se, filed a “motion for postconviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28489 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
se briefs, “[w]e cannot serve as both advocate and judge,” and will not scour the record to develop
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=171834 - 2017-09-21
se briefs, “[w]e cannot serve as both advocate and judge,” and will not scour the record to develop
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=171834 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Steven M. Sosinski
. Before Anderson, P.J., Nettesheim and Snyder, JJ. PER CURIAM. Steven M. Sosinski appeals pro se from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8340 - 2017-09-19
. Before Anderson, P.J., Nettesheim and Snyder, JJ. PER CURIAM. Steven M. Sosinski appeals pro se from
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8340 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Kupsky appeals pro se a circuit court order denying his postconviction motion under WIS. STAT. § 974.06
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=856524 - 2024-10-03
Kupsky appeals pro se a circuit court order denying his postconviction motion under WIS. STAT. § 974.06
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=856524 - 2024-10-03
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
that LaViolette was entitled to 307 days of sentence credit. In July 2017, acting pro se, LaViolette wrote
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238399 - 2019-03-29
that LaViolette was entitled to 307 days of sentence credit. In July 2017, acting pro se, LaViolette wrote
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=238399 - 2019-03-29
Jesus Barbary v. Charles Stokes
, it is frivolous per se on appeal.” Id. (emphasis in original). Accordingly, we conclude that Stokes is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11580 - 2005-03-31
, it is frivolous per se on appeal.” Id. (emphasis in original). Accordingly, we conclude that Stokes is entitled
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11580 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
, P.J., Fine and Kessler, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Cartel D. Weathers, pro se, appeals orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=83976 - 2012-07-11
, P.J., Fine and Kessler, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Cartel D. Weathers, pro se, appeals orders
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=83976 - 2012-07-11
[PDF]
State v. Francis McClendon
filed a pro se plea withdrawal motion alleging that: (1) his no contest plea was based upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20767 - 2017-09-21
filed a pro se plea withdrawal motion alleging that: (1) his no contest plea was based upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20767 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
. Before Dykman, Vergeront and Lundsten, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Antoine Nelson, pro se, appeals an order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34248 - 2014-09-15
. Before Dykman, Vergeront and Lundsten, JJ. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Antoine Nelson, pro se, appeals an order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34248 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
2 ¶1 PER CURIAM. Douglas A. Ruehl, pro se, appeals an order denying his WIS. STAT. § 974.06
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=61048 - 2014-09-15
2 ¶1 PER CURIAM. Douglas A. Ruehl, pro se, appeals an order denying his WIS. STAT. § 974.06
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=61048 - 2014-09-15