Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 17101 - 17110 of 29712 for des.
Search results 17101 - 17110 of 29712 for des.
09AP5 State v. Jill Y. Treleven.doc
: linda m. van De Water, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 ANDERSON, P.J.[1] Jill Y. Treleven contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36906 - 2009-06-30
: linda m. van De Water, Judge. Affirmed. ¶1 ANDERSON, P.J.[1] Jill Y. Treleven contends
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36906 - 2009-06-30
[PDF]
Kirk Bintzler v. Warden Thomas Borgen
). Because whether a claim is barred by sovereign immunity is a question of law that we decide de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18284 - 2017-09-21
). Because whether a claim is barred by sovereign immunity is a question of law that we decide de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18284 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
to those facts presents a question of law, which we review de novo.” State v. Drew, 2007 WI App 213, ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=37755 - 2014-09-15
to those facts presents a question of law, which we review de novo.” State v. Drew, 2007 WI App 213, ¶11
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=37755 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
, ... the decision not to admit the evidence is a question of constitutional fact that this court reviews de novo
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=367786 - 2021-05-18
, ... the decision not to admit the evidence is a question of constitutional fact that this court reviews de novo
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=367786 - 2021-05-18
[PDF]
State v. Todd R. Gilbertson
a “new factor” is a question of law, which we review de novo. Michels, 150 Wis.2d at 97, 441 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10480 - 2017-09-20
a “new factor” is a question of law, which we review de novo. Michels, 150 Wis.2d at 97, 441 N.W.2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10480 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, which we review de novo. See State v. Krier, 165 Wis. 2d 673, 676, 478 N.W.2d 63 (Ct. App. 1991
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=258474 - 2020-04-28
, which we review de novo. See State v. Krier, 165 Wis. 2d 673, 676, 478 N.W.2d 63 (Ct. App. 1991
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=258474 - 2020-04-28
[PDF]
State v. Kenneth E. Hopkins
, whether it was prejudicial, are legal issues we review de novo, id. at 236-37. A. Hearsay Statements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5146 - 2017-09-19
, whether it was prejudicial, are legal issues we review de novo, id. at 236-37. A. Hearsay Statements
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5146 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
grants of summary judgment de novo. Donaldson v. Urban Land Interests, Inc., 211 Wis. 2d 224, 229-30
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134102 - 2017-09-21
grants of summary judgment de novo. Donaldson v. Urban Land Interests, Inc., 211 Wis. 2d 224, 229-30
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=134102 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. John T. Werner
of law we review de novo. State v. Reitter, 227 Wis. 2d 213, 223, 595 N.W.2d 646 (1999). ¶12
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3297 - 2017-09-19
of law we review de novo. State v. Reitter, 227 Wis. 2d 213, 223, 595 N.W.2d 646 (1999). ¶12
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3297 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
review de novo whether counsel was deficient and whether any deficiency was prejudicial. State v
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239893 - 2019-04-25
review de novo whether counsel was deficient and whether any deficiency was prejudicial. State v
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=239893 - 2019-04-25