Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9721 - 9730 of 70081 for hi.
Search results 9721 - 9730 of 70081 for hi.
State v. Lamarcus D. Jones
) and 939.05 (2001-02),[1] and from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motion for relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7107 - 2005-03-31
) and 939.05 (2001-02),[1] and from the trial court’s order denying his postconviction motion for relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7107 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
denying his postconviction motion. He raises three issues on appeal: (1) his trial counsel provided
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=492217 - 2022-03-09
denying his postconviction motion. He raises three issues on appeal: (1) his trial counsel provided
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=492217 - 2022-03-09
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Michael J. Backes
misconduct committed in the course of No. 2004AP2093-D 2 his representation of F.M
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20018 - 2017-09-21
misconduct committed in the course of No. 2004AP2093-D 2 his representation of F.M
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=20018 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of conviction, entered upon his guilty plea, for one count of third-degree sexual assault. McGee also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=169799 - 2017-09-21
of conviction, entered upon his guilty plea, for one count of third-degree sexual assault. McGee also appeals
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=169799 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
illiteracy gives rise to an arguably meritorious basis for challenging his guilty plea. We have considered
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=114417 - 2017-09-21
illiteracy gives rise to an arguably meritorious basis for challenging his guilty plea. We have considered
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=114417 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
and from the order denying his postconviction motion for resentencing. He argues that the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57780 - 2010-12-14
and from the order denying his postconviction motion for resentencing. He argues that the sentence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57780 - 2010-12-14
CA Blank Order
-12)[1] and an order denying his postconviction motion seeking resentencing. Tucker’s appellate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=131523 - 2014-12-16
-12)[1] and an order denying his postconviction motion seeking resentencing. Tucker’s appellate
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=131523 - 2014-12-16
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
” as defined in WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2. I conclude that D.J. forfeited his due process argument
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251805 - 2020-01-02
” as defined in WIS. STAT. § 51.20(1)(a)2. I conclude that D.J. forfeited his due process argument
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251805 - 2020-01-02
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
in possession of a firearm. Jones also appeals the orders denying his postconviction motions. BACKGROUND
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249297 - 2019-10-29
in possession of a firearm. Jones also appeals the orders denying his postconviction motions. BACKGROUND
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249297 - 2019-10-29
State v. David J. Lenz
appeals two orders denying his motions to dismiss criminal nonsupport charges against him under § 948.22(2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15332 - 2005-03-31
appeals two orders denying his motions to dismiss criminal nonsupport charges against him under § 948.22(2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15332 - 2005-03-31