Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 54661 - 54670 of 61823 for judgment.
Search results 54661 - 54670 of 61823 for judgment.
[PDF]
NOTICE
Joseph R. Wall entered the judgment of conviction. The Honorable Kevin E. Martens considered DeJesus
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33275 - 2014-09-15
Joseph R. Wall entered the judgment of conviction. The Honorable Kevin E. Martens considered DeJesus
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33275 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
a conviction, an appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact unless
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45245 - 2014-09-15
a conviction, an appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact unless
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45245 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
that there were no issues of potential merit. We therefore affirmed the judgment of conviction and relieved
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32721 - 2014-09-15
that there were no issues of potential merit. We therefore affirmed the judgment of conviction and relieved
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32721 - 2014-09-15
CA Blank Order
. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is summarily affirmed. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107037 - 2014-01-16
. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is summarily affirmed. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.21
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=107037 - 2014-01-16
[PDF]
NOTICE
appeal. We summarily affirmed the judgment in June 1998. The supreme court denied Ellis’s petition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28147 - 2014-09-15
appeal. We summarily affirmed the judgment in June 1998. The supreme court denied Ellis’s petition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=28147 - 2014-09-15
Robert L. Worthon, Jr. v. Gerald A
, oppressive or unreasonable and represented its will and not its judgment, and whether the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7939 - 2005-03-31
, oppressive or unreasonable and represented its will and not its judgment, and whether the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7939 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
on the rationale that motions for reconsideration cannot be used to extend the time to appeal from a judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=660646 - 2023-05-31
on the rationale that motions for reconsideration cannot be used to extend the time to appeal from a judgment
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=660646 - 2023-05-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
the judgment and order, rejecting Burt’s claim that the sentencing court’s action violated the double
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134534 - 2017-09-21
the judgment and order, rejecting Burt’s claim that the sentencing court’s action violated the double
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134534 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Board of Attorneys Professional Responsibility v. Nancy A. Schlieve
or otherwise appear. The referee then had a hearing on the Board’s motion for default judgment, at which
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17342 - 2017-09-21
or otherwise appear. The referee then had a hearing on the Board’s motion for default judgment, at which
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17342 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
committed as to shock public sentiment and violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30157 - 2007-09-04
committed as to shock public sentiment and violate the judgment of reasonable people concerning what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30157 - 2007-09-04