Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 8591 - 8600 of 63732 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 8591 - 8600 of 63732 for Motion for joint custody.
State v. Steven R. Olson
., and Peterson, J. ¶1 PETERSON, J. Steven Olson appeals from an order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4552 - 2005-03-31
., and Peterson, J. ¶1 PETERSON, J. Steven Olson appeals from an order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4552 - 2005-03-31
State v. Brook Grzelak
, Grzelak filed and argued a motion to dismiss all charges with prejudice under § 976.05(3)(d), Stats
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12501 - 2005-03-31
, Grzelak filed and argued a motion to dismiss all charges with prejudice under § 976.05(3)(d), Stats
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12501 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
12, 2008. On June 17, 2009, Dunn County Human Services took custody of Autumn, and the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86688 - 2012-09-04
12, 2008. On June 17, 2009, Dunn County Human Services took custody of Autumn, and the circuit court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=86688 - 2012-09-04
[PDF]
WI APP 57
was revoked and denying his postconviction motion. Brimer argues his Fifth Amendment right against self
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48024 - 2014-09-15
was revoked and denying his postconviction motion. Brimer argues his Fifth Amendment right against self
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=48024 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
17, 2009, Dunn County Human Services took custody of Autumn, and the circuit court subsequently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=86688 - 2014-09-15
17, 2009, Dunn County Human Services took custody of Autumn, and the circuit court subsequently
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=86688 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
added), § 782.07(1). The return must state whether the respondent has the prisoner in custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31050 - 2007-12-03
added), § 782.07(1). The return must state whether the respondent has the prisoner in custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31050 - 2007-12-03
[PDF]
State v. Brook Grzelak
-day time limit expired. On the date set for sentencing, Grzelak filed and argued a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12501 - 2017-09-21
-day time limit expired. On the date set for sentencing, Grzelak filed and argued a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12501 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
motion for eighty-six days of credit against his sentence. Appellate counsel does not discuss Groce’s
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94997 - 2014-09-15
motion for eighty-six days of credit against his sentence. Appellate counsel does not discuss Groce’s
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94997 - 2014-09-15
[MS WORD]
CV-439: Order on Prisoner's Petition for Waiver of Prepayment of Fees/Costs
is indigent; · The prisoner authorized in writing the agency having custody of the prisoner's prison trust
/formdisplay/CV-439.doc?formNumber=CV-439&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2025-02-21
is indigent; · The prisoner authorized in writing the agency having custody of the prisoner's prison trust
/formdisplay/CV-439.doc?formNumber=CV-439&formType=Form&formatId=1&language=en - 2025-02-21
[PDF]
Mark J. Santner v. David H. Schwarz
rights were violated because too many days elapsed between the time he was taken into custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3489 - 2017-09-20
rights were violated because too many days elapsed between the time he was taken into custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3489 - 2017-09-20