Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 5861 - 5870 of 62336 for child support.
Search results 5861 - 5870 of 62336 for child support.
[PDF]
State v. Mark E. Smith
. Smith appeals two convictions of child enticement, contrary to § 948.07(1), STATS. He asserts that he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13255 - 2017-09-21
. Smith appeals two convictions of child enticement, contrary to § 948.07(1), STATS. He asserts that he
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13255 - 2017-09-21
State v. Gerald L. Larson
to support an in camera review. We conclude that he did and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18500 - 2005-06-14
to support an in camera review. We conclude that he did and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=18500 - 2005-06-14
State v. Mark R. Umhoefer
of conviction of causing great bodily harm to a child. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11701 - 2005-03-31
of conviction of causing great bodily harm to a child. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and argues
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11701 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Gerald L. Larson
to support an in camera review. We conclude that he did and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2 Larson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18500 - 2017-09-21
to support an in camera review. We conclude that he did and affirm the circuit court’s order. ¶2 Larson
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18500 - 2017-09-21
State v. Lindsey A.F.
language in the subsection and the legislative history do not support this interpretation. Further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16462 - 2005-03-31
language in the subsection and the legislative history do not support this interpretation. Further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16462 - 2005-03-31
State v. Lindsey A.F.
language in the subsection and the legislative history do not support this interpretation. Further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16461 - 2005-03-31
language in the subsection and the legislative history do not support this interpretation. Further
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16461 - 2005-03-31
CA Blank Order
no grounds exist to challenge Pittmon’s conviction for repeated sexual assault of child, with at least three
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=136289 - 2015-03-02
no grounds exist to challenge Pittmon’s conviction for repeated sexual assault of child, with at least three
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=136289 - 2015-03-02
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
sexual assault of the same child. His appellate counsel has filed a no-merit report pursuant to WIS
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142936 - 2017-09-21
sexual assault of the same child. His appellate counsel has filed a no-merit report pursuant to WIS
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=142936 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
Wuorenma’s conviction for second-degree sexual assault of a child under the age of sixteen, contrary to WIS
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206760 - 2018-01-09
Wuorenma’s conviction for second-degree sexual assault of a child under the age of sixteen, contrary to WIS
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=206760 - 2018-01-09
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of conviction for ten counts of possession of child pornography. His appellate counsel has filed a no-merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212718 - 2018-05-15
of conviction for ten counts of possession of child pornography. His appellate counsel has filed a no-merit
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212718 - 2018-05-15