Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9281 - 9290 of 43021 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Set Sudimoro Pacitan.
Search results 9281 - 9290 of 43021 for WA 0821 7001 0763 (FORTRESS) Pintu Baja Set Sudimoro Pacitan.
[PDF]
State v. Elvin L.P., Jr.
to be credible” as violative of the rule set forth in State v. Haseltine, 120 Wis. 2d 92, 96, 352 N.W.2d 673
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6597 - 2017-09-19
to be credible” as violative of the rule set forth in State v. Haseltine, 120 Wis. 2d 92, 96, 352 N.W.2d 673
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6597 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
judgment. Zorman’s affidavit does not set forth any facts to establish that his and his predecessor’s use
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=67958 - 2011-07-13
judgment. Zorman’s affidavit does not set forth any facts to establish that his and his predecessor’s use
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=67958 - 2011-07-13
[PDF]
NOTICE
in the case.” Id. at 471. When the circuit court sets forth the reasons for its decision under sec
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32175 - 2014-09-15
in the case.” Id. at 471. When the circuit court sets forth the reasons for its decision under sec
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32175 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
affirm the judgment of conviction. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. As set forth in the criminal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191678 - 2017-09-21
affirm the judgment of conviction. See WIS. STAT. RULE 809.21. As set forth in the criminal
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=191678 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a dangerous weapon, as a party to the crime. The trial court imposed a mandatory life sentence and set
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=345588 - 2021-03-16
a dangerous weapon, as a party to the crime. The trial court imposed a mandatory life sentence and set
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=345588 - 2021-03-16
[PDF]
State v. Stanley Lindsey
should be set forth. See McCleary v. State, 49 Wis. 2d 263, 277, 182 N.W.2d 512 (1971). “Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2121 - 2017-09-19
should be set forth. See McCleary v. State, 49 Wis. 2d 263, 277, 182 N.W.2d 512 (1971). “Discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2121 - 2017-09-19
State v. Tracy A. Kiefer
. The application of a statute to a particular set of facts is a question of law, which we review de novo. DOR v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10776 - 2005-03-31
. The application of a statute to a particular set of facts is a question of law, which we review de novo. DOR v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10776 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
will not be available to a petitioner.” Id. ¶7 Wisconsin Stat. § 974.06(8)[2] sets out the statutory provisions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98825 - 2013-07-01
will not be available to a petitioner.” Id. ¶7 Wisconsin Stat. § 974.06(8)[2] sets out the statutory provisions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=98825 - 2013-07-01
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
factor is “a fact or set of facts highly relevant to the imposition of sentence, but not known
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=201543 - 2017-11-15
factor is “a fact or set of facts highly relevant to the imposition of sentence, but not known
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=201543 - 2017-11-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a “fact or set of facts” “constitutes a ‘new factor’ is a question of law.” Id. A “new factor
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=569506 - 2022-09-28
a “fact or set of facts” “constitutes a ‘new factor’ is a question of law.” Id. A “new factor
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=569506 - 2022-09-28