Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 8801 - 8810 of 63537 for records.
Search results 8801 - 8810 of 63537 for records.
State v. William Avery
after it reviewed the records in camera and found that they were not relevant. The court held
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16020 - 2005-03-31
after it reviewed the records in camera and found that they were not relevant. The court held
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16020 - 2005-03-31
State v. Michael P. Stefko
. Our independent review of the record convinces us that this case is controlled by Woods. The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10097 - 2005-03-31
. Our independent review of the record convinces us that this case is controlled by Woods. The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10097 - 2005-03-31
State v. Lee D. Worby
, the court noted that based on Worby’s prior record and other matters considered at sentencing, it could
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2917 - 2005-03-31
, the court noted that based on Worby’s prior record and other matters considered at sentencing, it could
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2917 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
must show that the record contains an “unreasonable or unjustifiable basis” for the circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70202 - 2011-08-24
must show that the record contains an “unreasonable or unjustifiable basis” for the circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=70202 - 2011-08-24
[PDF]
State v. Lee D. Worby
. Further, the court noted that based on Worby’s prior record and other matters considered at sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2917 - 2017-09-19
. Further, the court noted that based on Worby’s prior record and other matters considered at sentencing
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2917 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
regarding estoppel were supported by substantial evidence in the record. We affirm for the reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103127 - 2017-09-21
regarding estoppel were supported by substantial evidence in the record. We affirm for the reasons
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=103127 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
James Merkel v. Village of Germantown
a certification of the record of the proceedings sought to be reviewed by the petition [and] [u]nlike an answer
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13273 - 2017-09-21
a certification of the record of the proceedings sought to be reviewed by the petition [and] [u]nlike an answer
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13273 - 2017-09-21
State v. Paul M. Nigl
records. See Wis. Stat. § 968.135. He also claims that disclosure of the result violated his expectation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6220 - 2005-03-31
records. See Wis. Stat. § 968.135. He also claims that disclosure of the result violated his expectation
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6220 - 2005-03-31
State v. Andre Derrick Wingo
before verdict the parties may stipulate in writing or by statement in open court, on the record
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17460 - 2005-03-31
before verdict the parties may stipulate in writing or by statement in open court, on the record
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17460 - 2005-03-31
State v. Idella Arrington
the record. We conclude that the no merit report correctly describes and analyzes the issues it identifies
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9144 - 2005-03-31
the record. We conclude that the no merit report correctly describes and analyzes the issues it identifies
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9144 - 2005-03-31