Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 18031 - 18040 of 29942 for des.
Search results 18031 - 18040 of 29942 for des.
[PDF]
State v. Jimmy Lee Hensley
, reviewed de novo. Id. at 265, 407 N.W.2d at 312. If we conclude that Hensley's trial counsel rendered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9812 - 2017-09-19
, reviewed de novo. Id. at 265, 407 N.W.2d at 312. If we conclude that Hensley's trial counsel rendered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9812 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
erroneous. Id. Whether these findings satisfy the statutory standards is a question of law we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=389831 - 2021-07-13
erroneous. Id. Whether these findings satisfy the statutory standards is a question of law we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=389831 - 2021-07-13
[PDF]
State v. Kenneth Simmons
curtilage and all occupants. We review de novo whether undisputed facts establish a constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12684 - 2017-09-21
curtilage and all occupants. We review de novo whether undisputed facts establish a constitutional
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12684 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Frontsheet
findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251320 - 2019-12-13
findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous. Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. See
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251320 - 2019-12-13
COURT OF APPEALS
and review de novo whether those facts satisfy the standard of probable cause. See County of Jefferson v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35613 - 2009-02-18
and review de novo whether those facts satisfy the standard of probable cause. See County of Jefferson v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35613 - 2009-02-18
State v. Odell M. Hardison
and Basting’s trial testimony is de minimis. Under either circumstance, there was enough evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20812 - 2005-12-27
and Basting’s trial testimony is de minimis. Under either circumstance, there was enough evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=20812 - 2005-12-27
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
. 1994). Whether Roth’s due process rights were violated is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=887952 - 2024-12-11
. 1994). Whether Roth’s due process rights were violated is a question of law we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=887952 - 2024-12-11
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the evidence satisfies the legal standard for protective placement is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1072857 - 2026-02-03
the evidence satisfies the legal standard for protective placement is a question of law that we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1072857 - 2026-02-03
State v. Albert L. Black
review de novo. State v. Tremaine Y., 2005 WI App 56, ¶9, 279 Wis. 2d 448, 694 N.W.2d 462. When we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26169 - 2006-08-09
review de novo. State v. Tremaine Y., 2005 WI App 56, ¶9, 279 Wis. 2d 448, 694 N.W.2d 462. When we
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=26169 - 2006-08-09
State v. David M. Mosel
a question of law, which we review de novo, State v. Johnson, 177 Wis.2d 224, 233, 501 N.W.2d 876, 879 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10848 - 2005-03-31
a question of law, which we review de novo, State v. Johnson, 177 Wis.2d 224, 233, 501 N.W.2d 876, 879 (Ct
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10848 - 2005-03-31