Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 7821 - 7830 of 12879 for se.
Search results 7821 - 7830 of 12879 for se.
[PDF]
State v. Augustin A. Pineda
and Fourteenth Amendments,1 a search conducted without a warrant issued upon probable cause is “per se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2545 - 2017-09-19
and Fourteenth Amendments,1 a search conducted without a warrant issued upon probable cause is “per se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2545 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
searches are per se unreasonable, subject to several clearly delineated exceptions.” State v. Artic
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=262190 - 2020-05-28
searches are per se unreasonable, subject to several clearly delineated exceptions.” State v. Artic
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=262190 - 2020-05-28
[PDF]
State v. Joachim E. Dressler
Dressler appeals pro se from an order denying his WIS. STAT. § 974.06 (2003-04) 1 motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21642 - 2017-09-21
Dressler appeals pro se from an order denying his WIS. STAT. § 974.06 (2003-04) 1 motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=21642 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
James H. Dumke v.
put to good use, thereby making the client’s pro se motion moot, or if no notice was filed during
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17367 - 2017-09-21
put to good use, thereby making the client’s pro se motion moot, or if no notice was filed during
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17367 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
not, as Nelson seems to suggest, render subsequent consent per se involuntary. Although initial refusal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34524 - 2008-11-05
not, as Nelson seems to suggest, render subsequent consent per se involuntary. Although initial refusal
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=34524 - 2008-11-05
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
the injunction orders. On May 21, 2024, Caroline and Ruby Smith, pro se, each filed a petition in the Door
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1033481 - 2025-11-04
the injunction orders. On May 21, 2024, Caroline and Ruby Smith, pro se, each filed a petition in the Door
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1033481 - 2025-11-04
COURT OF APPEALS
, pro se, appeals judgments convicting him of four counts of armed robbery with threat of force and one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88531 - 2012-10-22
, pro se, appeals judgments convicting him of four counts of armed robbery with threat of force and one
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88531 - 2012-10-22
[PDF]
State v. Richard L. Harris
does not offer any authority for the proposition that it is deficient performance per se to fail
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10759 - 2017-09-20
does not offer any authority for the proposition that it is deficient performance per se to fail
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10759 - 2017-09-20
Heritage Mutual Insurance Company v. James Heike
and to the defendant Fort, who was proceeding pro se: We have the Court’s Order Granting Summary Judgment. We ask each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13473 - 2005-03-31
and to the defendant Fort, who was proceeding pro se: We have the Court’s Order Granting Summary Judgment. We ask each
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13473 - 2005-03-31
State v. Daniel T. Raymond
, P.J.[1] Daniel T. Raymond appeals pro se from a forfeiture judgment of conviction for operating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5301 - 2005-03-31
, P.J.[1] Daniel T. Raymond appeals pro se from a forfeiture judgment of conviction for operating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5301 - 2005-03-31