Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9441 - 9450 of 57315 for id.
Search results 9441 - 9450 of 57315 for id.
[PDF]
State v. Anthony J. Rychtik
that there is a new factor justifying a motion to modify a sentence. Id. A new factor is a fact or set of facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4656 - 2017-09-19
that there is a new factor justifying a motion to modify a sentence. Id. A new factor is a fact or set of facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4656 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
an objective standard of reasonableness.” Id. at 687-88. To prove prejudice, “[t]he defendant must show
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1075035 - 2026-02-10
an objective standard of reasonableness.” Id. at 687-88. To prove prejudice, “[t]he defendant must show
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1075035 - 2026-02-10
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a constitutional issue that this court reviews independently. Id. A defendant who moves for resentencing
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=542850 - 2022-07-19
a constitutional issue that this court reviews independently. Id. A defendant who moves for resentencing
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=542850 - 2022-07-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
warrant relief.” See id., ¶13. Specifically, we concluded that the motion failed to “show that Scott
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252302 - 2020-01-08
warrant relief.” See id., ¶13. Specifically, we concluded that the motion failed to “show that Scott
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=252302 - 2020-01-08
State v. Curtis Ellis, Jr.
to apply constitutional principles to the facts as found" by the trial court. Id. at 344, 401 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7990 - 2005-03-31
to apply constitutional principles to the facts as found" by the trial court. Id. at 344, 401 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7990 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
for Fourth Amendment challenges. Id., 210 Wis. 2d at 606, 563 N.W.2d at 505. The particularity requirement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89201 - 2012-11-13
for Fourth Amendment challenges. Id., 210 Wis. 2d at 606, 563 N.W.2d at 505. The particularity requirement
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=89201 - 2012-11-13
[PDF]
County of Ashland v. John J. Jaakkola
is on reasonableness and the determination of reasonableness depends on the totality of the circumstances. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9065 - 2017-09-19
is on reasonableness and the determination of reasonableness depends on the totality of the circumstances. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9065 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. “‘[T]he weight of the testimony
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39222 - 2009-08-10
court’s findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Id. “‘[T]he weight of the testimony
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=39222 - 2009-08-10
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
acquitted.’” Id. (citation omitted). Ultimately, the record provides no basis for us to conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=722201 - 2023-10-31
acquitted.’” Id. (citation omitted). Ultimately, the record provides no basis for us to conclude
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=722201 - 2023-10-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
not address both prongs “if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.” Id. at 697. To prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77606 - 2014-09-15
not address both prongs “if the defendant makes an insufficient showing on one.” Id. at 697. To prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=77606 - 2014-09-15