Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 52721 - 52730 of 55840 for n y c.
Search results 52721 - 52730 of 55840 for n y c.
State v. Roger Johnson
) (maximum penalty for Class D felony is ten years in prison) (2001–02); 939.62(1)(c) (habitual-criminality
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7410 - 2005-03-31
) (maximum penalty for Class D felony is ten years in prison) (2001–02); 939.62(1)(c) (habitual-criminality
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7410 - 2005-03-31
2009 WI APP 74
. No. 2008AP2027(C) ¶13 ANDERSON, P.J. (concurring). I write separately for three reasons. First
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35974 - 2011-06-14
. No. 2008AP2027(C) ¶13 ANDERSON, P.J. (concurring). I write separately for three reasons. First
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35974 - 2011-06-14
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Milwaukee County Safety Building Electronic Notice Dustin C. Haskell Electronic Notice Sara Lynn
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=818675 - 2024-07-02
Milwaukee County Safety Building Electronic Notice Dustin C. Haskell Electronic Notice Sara Lynn
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=818675 - 2024-07-02
[PDF]
State v. Steven H.
c. Videotaped Deposition in lieu of In Person Testimony of Victims Admission of the videotaped
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10961 - 2017-09-19
c. Videotaped Deposition in lieu of In Person Testimony of Victims Admission of the videotaped
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10961 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
WI APP 215
by each party. (c) Whether one of the parties has substantial assets not subject to division
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26454 - 2014-09-15
by each party. (c) Whether one of the parties has substantial assets not subject to division
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26454 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
Miriam T. v. Church Mutual Insurance Company
.3 C. Coverage issue. In its order, the trial court stated that “the motion of the defendant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10337 - 2017-09-20
.3 C. Coverage issue. In its order, the trial court stated that “the motion of the defendant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10337 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
State v. Angela M.W.
or mitigating circumstances which would not be apparent to them. (c) Make such inquiries
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13568 - 2017-09-21
or mitigating circumstances which would not be apparent to them. (c) Make such inquiries
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13568 - 2017-09-21
State v. Mark A. Mayer
court for Milwaukee County: Robert C. Crawford, Judge. Affirmed. CURLEY, J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14514 - 2005-03-31
court for Milwaukee County: Robert C. Crawford, Judge. Affirmed. CURLEY, J.[1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14514 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Alfredo Ramirez
, and William C. Wolford, assistant attorney general. COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3071 - 2017-09-19
, and William C. Wolford, assistant attorney general. COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3071 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Michael D. Gundlach
This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to § 752.31(2)(c), STATS. No. 95-1600-CR -2- (3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9179 - 2017-09-19
This appeal is decided by one judge pursuant to § 752.31(2)(c), STATS. No. 95-1600-CR -2- (3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9179 - 2017-09-19