Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 7221 - 7230 of 63537 for records.
Search results 7221 - 7230 of 63537 for records.
State v. Thomas J. Becker
consideration of the report and an independent review of the record, we conclude that there is no arguable merit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10499 - 2005-03-31
consideration of the report and an independent review of the record, we conclude that there is no arguable merit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10499 - 2005-03-31
Karl Julius James v. Michael J. Sullivan
or oppressive and the evidence of record substantiates the decision.” Id. James first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11425 - 2005-03-31
or oppressive and the evidence of record substantiates the decision.” Id. James first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11425 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
to change his prison custody classification. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=93275 - 2014-09-15
to change his prison custody classification. Based upon our review of the briefs and record, we conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=93275 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a response, and has not responded. We have independently reviewed the record and the no-merit report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=964079 - 2025-06-03
a response, and has not responded. We have independently reviewed the record and the no-merit report
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=964079 - 2025-06-03
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=107259 - 2017-09-21
of the briefs and record, we conclude at conference that this case is appropriate for summary disposition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=107259 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
to respond to matters that were not in the appellate record.1 We conclude that most of Brown’s allegations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44824 - 2014-09-15
to respond to matters that were not in the appellate record.1 We conclude that most of Brown’s allegations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44824 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
it was not verified as required by WIS. STAT. § 782.04 (2017-18).1 Based upon our review of the briefs and record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=248032 - 2019-10-02
it was not verified as required by WIS. STAT. § 782.04 (2017-18).1 Based upon our review of the briefs and record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=248032 - 2019-10-02
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
right to respond to the report and has not responded. Upon our independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207740 - 2018-01-30
right to respond to the report and has not responded. Upon our independent review of the record
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=207740 - 2018-01-30
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
record, as well as the no-merit report, I agree with counsel’s assessment that there are no arguably
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211962 - 2018-04-25
record, as well as the no-merit report, I agree with counsel’s assessment that there are no arguably
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=211962 - 2018-04-25
State v. Jerry L. Anderson
and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that there is no arguable merit to any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11462 - 2005-03-31
and an independent review of the record as mandated by Anders, we conclude that there is no arguable merit to any
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11462 - 2005-03-31