Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 6741 - 6750 of 68445 for did.
Search results 6741 - 6750 of 68445 for did.
COURT OF APPEALS
properly exercised its sentencing discretion. We conclude that it did and, therefore, affirm. BACKGROUND
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35639 - 2009-02-23
properly exercised its sentencing discretion. We conclude that it did and, therefore, affirm. BACKGROUND
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35639 - 2009-02-23
[PDF]
County of Dane v. John S. McKenzie
-1009 00-1010 2 (OMVWI) and failure to notify police of an accident.2 He claims the County did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2498 - 2017-09-19
-1009 00-1010 2 (OMVWI) and failure to notify police of an accident.2 He claims the County did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2498 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. David Gallagher
was not advised of and did not understand the elements of the offense. We disagree and conclude that Gallagher
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4527 - 2017-09-19
was not advised of and did not understand the elements of the offense. We disagree and conclude that Gallagher
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4527 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
County of Dane v. John S. McKenzie
-1009 00-1010 2 (OMVWI) and failure to notify police of an accident.2 He claims the County did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2496 - 2017-09-19
-1009 00-1010 2 (OMVWI) and failure to notify police of an accident.2 He claims the County did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2496 - 2017-09-19
Paul G. Walker v. Eau Claire County Child Support Agency
detriment. We disagree and affirm because Walker did not reasonably rely on Purvis’s actions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15052 - 2005-03-31
detriment. We disagree and affirm because Walker did not reasonably rely on Purvis’s actions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15052 - 2005-03-31
James O'Connor v. Carma Sue Rainer
that: (1) the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the statute of frauds did not bar his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15695 - 2005-03-31
that: (1) the trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the statute of frauds did not bar his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15695 - 2005-03-31
State v. Robert J. Smokovich
she left for work that morning and that she did not give anyone permission to forcibly enter the home
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5871 - 2005-03-31
she left for work that morning and that she did not give anyone permission to forcibly enter the home
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5871 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
home in the next nine months?” Debra’s trial counsel did not object to the testimony. On appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99612 - 2014-09-15
home in the next nine months?” Debra’s trial counsel did not object to the testimony. On appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=99612 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Michael G. Kachelski
between counsel and the State Public Defender’s office, and (2) his trial counsel did not provide him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12450 - 2017-09-21
between counsel and the State Public Defender’s office, and (2) his trial counsel did not provide him
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12450 - 2017-09-21
State v. Bradley Brownlee
-an-officer charge which did not adequately define "lawful authority." Appellate counsel argued that because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8462 - 2005-03-31
-an-officer charge which did not adequately define "lawful authority." Appellate counsel argued that because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8462 - 2005-03-31