Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 9931 - 9940 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
Search results 9931 - 9940 of 63734 for Motion for joint custody.
COURT OF APPEALS
sentence was in custody under sentence of a court for purposes of filing a motion for postconviction relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57475 - 2010-12-07
sentence was in custody under sentence of a court for purposes of filing a motion for postconviction relief
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=57475 - 2010-12-07
City of Watertown v. Jeffrey Busshardt
under sub. (1), or on its own motion, the circuit court shall order that a new trial be held in circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9131 - 2005-03-31
under sub. (1), or on its own motion, the circuit court shall order that a new trial be held in circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9131 - 2005-03-31
State v. Bonnie L.K.
if there has been no motion for a new trial. Id. at 270, 40 N.W.2d at 558. Bonnie
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10900 - 2005-03-31
if there has been no motion for a new trial. Id. at 270, 40 N.W.2d at 558. Bonnie
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10900 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Bonnie L.K.
to prepare but is no more than 20 days from the plea hearing for a child who is held in secure custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10900 - 2017-09-20
to prepare but is no more than 20 days from the plea hearing for a child who is held in secure custody
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10900 - 2017-09-20
Brown County Department of Human Services v. Kim A. S.
its discretion by denying his motion to suppress a videotape; (2) the court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12674 - 2005-03-31
its discretion by denying his motion to suppress a videotape; (2) the court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12674 - 2005-03-31
Brown County Department of Human Services v. Kim A. S.
its discretion by denying his motion to suppress a videotape; (2) the court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12675 - 2005-03-31
its discretion by denying his motion to suppress a videotape; (2) the court erroneously exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12675 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
in violation of a motion in limine order; and when the State conducted additional forensic testing on a piece
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31146 - 2007-12-11
in violation of a motion in limine order; and when the State conducted additional forensic testing on a piece
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=31146 - 2007-12-11
2006 WI APP 257
the motion. Shain opposed the motion, arguing that the “Baseball Rule” applies only to spectators and should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27204 - 2006-12-19
the motion. Shain opposed the motion, arguing that the “Baseball Rule” applies only to spectators and should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27204 - 2006-12-19
[PDF]
State v. Steven M. Kuenzi
to § 346.63(1)(a), STATS. He contends the trial court erred in denying a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13759 - 2014-09-15
to § 346.63(1)(a), STATS. He contends the trial court erred in denying a motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13759 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
in the courthouse parking lot; when a State witness mentioned a previous theft in violation of a motion in limine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31146 - 2014-09-15
in the courthouse parking lot; when a State witness mentioned a previous theft in violation of a motion in limine
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31146 - 2014-09-15