Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9581 - 9590 of 12869 for se.
Search results 9581 - 9590 of 12869 for se.
State v. Michael D. Sykes
. . . was making in my judgment an investigatory stop per se or, pat down, which he had a right to do under
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17870 - 2005-05-02
. . . was making in my judgment an investigatory stop per se or, pat down, which he had a right to do under
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17870 - 2005-05-02
State v. Marty R. Caban
and seizures . . . .” A warrantless search is unreasonable per se. State v. Johnston, 184 Wis. 2d 794, 518
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16907 - 2005-03-31
and seizures . . . .” A warrantless search is unreasonable per se. State v. Johnston, 184 Wis. 2d 794, 518
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16907 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Jesus Ortega, Jr. v. Gary R. McCaughtry
: On behalf of the petitioner-appellant, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Jesus Ortega, Jr., pro se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13125 - 2017-09-21
: On behalf of the petitioner-appellant, the cause was submitted on the briefs of Jesus Ortega, Jr., pro se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13125 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Natisha W.
and the appellate courts of this state have never said that incarceration per se equals failure to assume parental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6451 - 2017-09-19
and the appellate courts of this state have never said that incarceration per se equals failure to assume parental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6451 - 2017-09-19
State v. Natisha W.
rights and the appellate courts of this state have never said that incarceration per se equals failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6451 - 2005-03-31
rights and the appellate courts of this state have never said that incarceration per se equals failure
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6451 - 2005-03-31
Pamela S. Predick v. Margaret O'Connor
is a per se violation of constitutional rights and that a court should not have the authority to impose
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4975 - 2005-03-31
is a per se violation of constitutional rights and that a court should not have the authority to impose
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4975 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
an expert to challenge the DNA evidence. No. 2019AP1140 5 ¶9 In October 2013, Weyker pro se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=259855 - 2020-05-07
an expert to challenge the DNA evidence. No. 2019AP1140 5 ¶9 In October 2013, Weyker pro se
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=259855 - 2020-05-07
[PDF]
Raymond Allen v. Elizabeth Snider Allen
Elizabeth appeared pro se at the hearing on her motions on February 2, 1999. The court denied the request
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15386 - 2017-09-21
Elizabeth appeared pro se at the hearing on her motions on February 2, 1999. The court denied the request
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15386 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Robert John Prihoda
on behalf of the defendant, along with a pro se motion filed by the defendant, show that he knew that his
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17420 - 2017-09-21
on behalf of the defendant, along with a pro se motion filed by the defendant, show that he knew that his
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17420 - 2017-09-21
State v. Robert John Prihoda
imposed on count two." ¶40 On December 5, 1980, the defendant filed a pro se postconviction motion
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17420 - 2005-03-31
imposed on count two." ¶40 On December 5, 1980, the defendant filed a pro se postconviction motion
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17420 - 2005-03-31