Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 15891 - 15900 of 29823 for des.
Search results 15891 - 15900 of 29823 for des.
State v. Louis M. Elizondo, Jr.
is a question of constitutional fact which we review de novo, since the trial court “has no discretion” to deny
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12623 - 2005-03-31
is a question of constitutional fact which we review de novo, since the trial court “has no discretion” to deny
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12623 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
is a legal question that we review de novo. Harvot v. Solo Cup Co., 2009 WI 85, ¶¶31-32, 320 Wis.2d 1, 768
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82292 - 2012-05-09
is a legal question that we review de novo. Harvot v. Solo Cup Co., 2009 WI 85, ¶¶31-32, 320 Wis.2d 1, 768
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82292 - 2012-05-09
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo. N.J.W. v. State, 168 Wis. 2d 646, 652, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Ct. App. 1992). “The findings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1030511 - 2025-10-29
review de novo. N.J.W. v. State, 168 Wis. 2d 646, 652, 485 N.W.2d 70 (Ct. App. 1992). “The findings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1030511 - 2025-10-29
COURT OF APPEALS
a motion was sufficiently supported to warrant an evidentiary hearing is a legal issue that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=47753 - 2010-03-08
a motion was sufficiently supported to warrant an evidentiary hearing is a legal issue that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=47753 - 2010-03-08
Thyra K. v. Community Care Organization of Milwaukee County, Inc.
are recoverable, is a question of law that is subject to our de novo review. Elliott v. Donahue, 169 Wis.2d 310
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11691 - 2005-03-31
are recoverable, is a question of law that is subject to our de novo review. Elliott v. Donahue, 169 Wis.2d 310
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11691 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
was deficient and whether the deficiency prejudiced the defense are questions of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33046 - 2008-06-16
was deficient and whether the deficiency prejudiced the defense are questions of law that we review de novo. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33046 - 2008-06-16
State v. Chris C. Lichtenberg
to a speedy trial has been violated is a constitutional question we review de novo, although we will uphold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5602 - 2005-03-31
to a speedy trial has been violated is a constitutional question we review de novo, although we will uphold
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5602 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
NOTICE
was deficient or prejudicial are questions of law we determine de novo. Id. The court may deny
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35560 - 2014-09-15
was deficient or prejudicial are questions of law we determine de novo. Id. The court may deny
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35560 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is a legal determination that this court decides de novo. See id. We need not address both prongs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=214655 - 2018-06-26
is a legal determination that this court decides de novo. See id. We need not address both prongs
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=214655 - 2018-06-26
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
erroneous ... then independently apply the law to those facts de novo.” Id. We review a circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212317 - 2018-05-09
erroneous ... then independently apply the law to those facts de novo.” Id. We review a circuit court’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=212317 - 2018-05-09