Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9511 - 9520 of 72902 for we.
Search results 9511 - 9520 of 72902 for we.
[PDF]
State v. Ronald L. Dantuma
motion to suppress the statement and allowed it to go to the jury. ¶3 Because we are satisfied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15492 - 2017-09-21
motion to suppress the statement and allowed it to go to the jury. ¶3 Because we are satisfied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15492 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
William Olson v. Sidney Kaprelian
he had posted in a separate criminal matter. We agree and thus reverse the trial court's order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9560 - 2017-09-19
he had posted in a separate criminal matter. We agree and thus reverse the trial court's order
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9560 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
or others under any of the standards set forth in WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2. We reverse the recommitment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=425948 - 2021-09-14
or others under any of the standards set forth in WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2. We reverse the recommitment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=425948 - 2021-09-14
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
reconsideration1 of his WIS. STAT. § 974.06 (2017-18) motion. We affirm. ¶2 A jury found Glass guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=295882 - 2020-10-14
reconsideration1 of his WIS. STAT. § 974.06 (2017-18) motion. We affirm. ¶2 A jury found Glass guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=295882 - 2020-10-14
Verdell Toles v. Rod Lanser
appeals, pro se, from the trial court order denying his petition for a writ of mandamus. We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10697 - 2005-03-31
appeals, pro se, from the trial court order denying his petition for a writ of mandamus. We affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10697 - 2005-03-31
Robert Skenandore v. Michael J. Sullivan
the petition. Because the trial court did not err, we affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 Skenandore pled guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14888 - 2005-03-31
the petition. Because the trial court did not err, we affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 Skenandore pled guilty
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14888 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Brent L. Miller
, 2000 WI 121, ___ Wis. 2d ___, 619 N.W.2d 913 (Wis. Oct. 17, 2000), we affirm the conviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15991 - 2017-09-21
, 2000 WI 121, ___ Wis. 2d ___, 619 N.W.2d 913 (Wis. Oct. 17, 2000), we affirm the conviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15991 - 2017-09-21
Deborah Martin-Semrow v. Marc Raymond Semrow
authority, we affirm. Additionally, we conclude that the firm’s appeal is not frivolous under § 809.25(3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13612 - 2005-03-31
authority, we affirm. Additionally, we conclude that the firm’s appeal is not frivolous under § 809.25(3
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13612 - 2005-03-31
Rustam Gallery Oriental Rugs v. Christine Lindemann
the trial she was not given a reasonable amount of time to examine. We affirm because the receipt
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5638 - 2005-03-31
the trial she was not given a reasonable amount of time to examine. We affirm because the receipt
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5638 - 2005-03-31
Bernhard K. Benn v. Larry L. Vitort
809.25. We affirm the judgment and remand for determination of attorney fees and costs under Rule 809.25
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5637 - 2005-03-31
809.25. We affirm the judgment and remand for determination of attorney fees and costs under Rule 809.25
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5637 - 2005-03-31