Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 1821 - 1830 of 44653 for adult name change.

State v. James L.C. - 1994AP002468
be better served by being treated as an adult, one of the factors being that he would become eighteen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8112 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Jace H. - 2012AP002479
¶1 REILLY, J. 1 The State sought the waiver of Jace H. into adult court, utilizing the offenses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=102169 - 2017-09-21

State v. Jace H. - 2012AP002479
REILLY, J.[1] The State sought the waiver of Jace H. into adult court, utilizing the offenses alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=102169 - 2013-09-24

State v. Arch L. H. - 1996AP002311
, between ten and twenty videotaped pornographic movies involving adults and teenagers, and a foot-long
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11256 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] The Third Branch, fall 1997
and executive branches set the budget. The legislature creates substantive law which changes the workload
/news/thirdbranch/docs/fall97.pdf - 2009-12-02

[PDF] State v. Eric L. Fankhauser - 2011AP000294
jurisdiction was proper because he was not legally No. 2011AP294 2 processed into adult court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=76223 - 2014-09-15

State v. Samuel J.G. - 1996AP001192
exercised its discretion by refusing to waive Samuel into adult court. Because this court concludes
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10742 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Samuel J.G. - 1996AP001192
by refusing to waive Samuel into adult court. Because this court concludes that the circuit court did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10742 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] State v. Chester Gulan - 2005AP000629
but made no momentous changes. 2 State v. Stenzel, 2004 WI App 181, ¶9, 276 Wis. 2d 224, 688 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=24516 - 2017-09-21

State v. Chester Gulan - 2005AP000629
, the Wisconsin Supreme Court revitalized sentencing jurisprudence but made no momentous changes.[2] State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=24516 - 2006-03-21