Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 80151 - 80160 of 83055 for simple case.

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED January 23, 2007 A. John Voelker Acting Clerk of Court...
counsel was ineffective: (1) for failing to conduct an adequate investigation into the facts of his case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27843 - 2007-01-22

Alphonso Hubanks v. Gary R. McCaughtry
demonstrated and the time between the crime and the confrontation. Id. In this case, the victim heard Hubanks
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13241 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Ronald Waites
. 1 In a May 8, 1996 order entered in court of appeals case No. 96-0703-W, we held in abeyance
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9966 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] NOTICE
. 3 After the jury returned its verdict, Richardson moved to have it set aside. In such a case
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=51566 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. Id. No. 2017AP275-CR 5 ¶9 The problem for Laws is that the facts in this case go
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=208752 - 2018-02-22

COURT OF APPEALS
. This opinion will not be published. See Wis. Stat. Rule 809.23(1)(b)5. [1] Because this case involves
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=113168 - 2014-05-28

State v. Steven T. Moore
. Such is the case here. ¶18 As explained, the State, at a refusal hearing, has a very low threshold to clear
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17853 - 2005-04-26

[PDF] CA Blank Order
that this case is appropriate for summary disposition. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21 (2019-20).1 We affirm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=590167 - 2022-11-16

State v. Derek E.
in this case plus the other one that he’s involved in where he’s already been waived, plus the fact that he’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13319 - 2005-03-31

Kohler Company v. The Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York
denied the motion but remanded the case to the trial court for consideration of the effect
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8688 - 2005-03-31