Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 7781 - 7790 of 70016 for hi.

State v. Lloyd Edwin Sellers
that his statements to police were made voluntarily and in accordance with his right to counsel; (2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10976 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
of crimes in Wisconsin, where his sentences were ordered to be served consecutively to his federal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=69580 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED September 19, 2012 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of ...
. The officer testified that he first activated his lights on a city street but “unfortunately [the driver
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87196 - 2012-09-18

COURT OF APPEALS
an order denying his motion for postconviction relief based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=56618 - 2010-11-16

[PDF] NOTICE
and maintenance purposes, Allison’s income was $77,000 per year ($6416 per month), the amount he earned in his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30986 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] NOTICE
the influence of an intoxicant. On July 17, 2007, at 10:48 p.m., sometime after Palmer pulled his vehicle
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33709 - 2014-09-15

State v. Willie C. Simpson
a postconviction order. Simpson raises two claims of error. He contends that the trial court violated his federal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4322 - 2005-03-31

Anne C. Puchner v. John D. Puchner
to Wisconsin to visit his son. On September 6, the arrest order was stayed pending disposition of this appeal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7913 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
in WIS. STAT. RULE 809.23(3). ¶1 PER CURIAM. Marcus Williams, by counsel, appeals his judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=920929 - 2025-02-27

Eliud Velez v. Jon Litscher
PER CURIAM. Eliud Velez appeals from an order dismissing his action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6628 - 2005-03-31