Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9771 - 9780 of 58462 for o j.
Search results 9771 - 9780 of 58462 for o j.
COURT OF APPEALS
-APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Marquette County: Richard O. Wright, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68697 - 2011-07-27
-APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Marquette County: Richard O. Wright, Judge. Affirmed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=68697 - 2011-07-27
State v. Frankie Wardell Simmons
into the record nor clearly stated,” “[t]here was no plea c[o]lloquy conducted in this case period,” and “[i]f
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4039 - 2005-03-31
into the record nor clearly stated,” “[t]here was no plea c[o]lloquy conducted in this case period,” and “[i]f
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4039 - 2005-03-31
Michael S. Jakubowski v. NEVAC, Inc.
., Defendants, Badger Commercial Sales, Inc., Defendant-Respondent, Schultz Sav O Stores, Inc
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3268 - 2005-03-31
., Defendants, Badger Commercial Sales, Inc., Defendant-Respondent, Schultz Sav O Stores, Inc
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3268 - 2005-03-31
State v. Andrew R. Knauer
of the circuit court for Marquette County: Richard o. wright, Judge. Reversed and cause remanded. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5879 - 2005-03-31
of the circuit court for Marquette County: Richard o. wright, Judge. Reversed and cause remanded. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5879 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Andrew R. Knauer
of the circuit court for Marquette County: RICHARD O. WRIGHT, Judge. Reversed and cause remanded. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5879 - 2017-09-19
of the circuit court for Marquette County: RICHARD O. WRIGHT, Judge. Reversed and cause remanded. ¶1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5879 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. James D. Curtis
. In State ex rel. Nowak v. Circuit Court, 169 Wis.2d 395, 485 N.W.2d 419 (Ct. App. 1992), we held: [O
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11094 - 2017-09-19
. In State ex rel. Nowak v. Circuit Court, 169 Wis.2d 395, 485 N.W.2d 419 (Ct. App. 1992), we held: [O
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11094 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
assertions that are lettered “A.” through “O.” ¶4 We reject this first argument because Mark does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=663928 - 2023-06-02
assertions that are lettered “A.” through “O.” ¶4 We reject this first argument because Mark does
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=663928 - 2023-06-02
[PDF]
State v. James A. Smith
be appointed. Smith replied, “[n]o. I do not want [the public defender’s] office to supply me
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26318 - 2017-09-21
be appointed. Smith replied, “[n]o. I do not want [the public defender’s] office to supply me
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26318 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
and “[o]ne may be confined or restrained by acts or words or both.” The jury was also instructed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=136553 - 2017-09-21
and “[o]ne may be confined or restrained by acts or words or both.” The jury was also instructed
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=136553 - 2017-09-21
State v. Nicholas S. Cole
. The trial court summarily denied the motion because “[n]o transcript of the plea hearing was ordered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25414 - 2006-06-05
. The trial court summarily denied the motion because “[n]o transcript of the plea hearing was ordered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25414 - 2006-06-05