Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15831 - 15840 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
Search results 15831 - 15840 of 30154 for consulta de causas.
[PDF]
State v. Marquis D. Rosenburg
is a question of law which we review de novo without deference to the decisions of the lower courts. Eby v
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17030 - 2017-09-21
is a question of law which we review de novo without deference to the decisions of the lower courts. Eby v
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17030 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Corinne L. v. Douglas P.
was a proper exercise of discretion presents a question of law, which we review de novo. Id. We must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2428 - 2017-09-19
was a proper exercise of discretion presents a question of law, which we review de novo. Id. We must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2428 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of law we review de novo. Id. at 127-28. ¶7 Whether a plea was knowingly, voluntarily
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=89384 - 2014-09-15
of law we review de novo. Id. at 127-28. ¶7 Whether a plea was knowingly, voluntarily
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=89384 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Darrell C. Solfest
, the issue presented by this case is one of statutory construction. As such, a de novo standard of review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12201 - 2017-09-21
, the issue presented by this case is one of statutory construction. As such, a de novo standard of review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12201 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Michael E. Learmont
this court reviews de novo. See Littrup, 164 Wis.2d at 126, 473 N.W.2d at 166. Learmont's due process
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14673 - 2017-09-21
this court reviews de novo. See Littrup, 164 Wis.2d at 126, 473 N.W.2d at 166. Learmont's due process
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14673 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
that person’s consent. We decide the issue of whether the convictions are multiplicitous de novo. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32211 - 2008-03-25
that person’s consent. We decide the issue of whether the convictions are multiplicitous de novo. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32211 - 2008-03-25
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
De Peters Electronic Notice You are hereby notified that the Court has entered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=815692 - 2024-06-25
De Peters Electronic Notice You are hereby notified that the Court has entered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=815692 - 2024-06-25
State v. Owen Andrew Kreinus
(1983). ¶13 Whether a “new factor” exists is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17754 - 2005-04-18
(1983). ¶13 Whether a “new factor” exists is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17754 - 2005-04-18
State v. Demetrius N.O.
which this court reviews de novo. See Brandt v. LIRC, 160 Wis.2d 353, 361, 466 N.W.2d 673, 676 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11908 - 2005-03-31
which this court reviews de novo. See Brandt v. LIRC, 160 Wis.2d 353, 361, 466 N.W.2d 673, 676 (Ct. App
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11908 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
“reviewed all the records for this account” and “ma[de] this Affidavit based upon personal knowledge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94377 - 2014-09-15
“reviewed all the records for this account” and “ma[de] this Affidavit based upon personal knowledge
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94377 - 2014-09-15