Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23051 - 23060 of 29823 for des.
Search results 23051 - 23060 of 29823 for des.
[PDF]
State v. Lisimba Love
facts which, if true, would entitle a defendant to relief is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3765 - 2017-09-19
facts which, if true, would entitle a defendant to relief is a question of law that we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3765 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
NOTICE
Standard of Review. We determine de novo whether the defendant’s postconviction motion alleging
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34028 - 2014-09-15
Standard of Review. We determine de novo whether the defendant’s postconviction motion alleging
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=34028 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
of law. We review directed verdicts de novo. Millonig v. Bakken, 112 Wis. 2d 445, 450, 334 N.W.2d 80
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35265 - 2014-09-15
of law. We review directed verdicts de novo. Millonig v. Bakken, 112 Wis. 2d 445, 450, 334 N.W.2d 80
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=35265 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of [WIS. STAT.] § 51.35 present questions of law that we review de novo.” Samuel J.H., 349 Wis. 2d 202
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=404649 - 2021-08-05
of [WIS. STAT.] § 51.35 present questions of law that we review de novo.” Samuel J.H., 349 Wis. 2d 202
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=404649 - 2021-08-05
[PDF]
State v. Roger P. Barber
facts’ which this court may review de novo.” Id. The constitutional right to present evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13448 - 2017-09-21
facts’ which this court may review de novo.” Id. The constitutional right to present evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13448 - 2017-09-21
State v. Scott Heimermann
reviewing “[t]he ultimate determination of whether counsel's performance was deficient and prejudicial” de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8548 - 2005-03-31
reviewing “[t]he ultimate determination of whether counsel's performance was deficient and prejudicial” de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8548 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
judgment decision de novo. See Star Direct, Inc. v. Dal Pra, 2009 WI 76, ¶18, 319 Wis. 2d 274, 767 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=196767 - 2017-09-21
judgment decision de novo. See Star Direct, Inc. v. Dal Pra, 2009 WI 76, ¶18, 319 Wis. 2d 274, 767 N.W
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=196767 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
of the premises and a de novo hearing. Barbian also tried to subpoena the Secretary of the Board. The circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30658 - 2007-10-22
of the premises and a de novo hearing. Barbian also tried to subpoena the Secretary of the Board. The circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30658 - 2007-10-22
Candace M. Sorenson v. Howard E. Sorenson
de novo. Support and maintenance are left to a trial court's discretion. When we review a trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7881 - 2005-03-31
de novo. Support and maintenance are left to a trial court's discretion. When we review a trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7881 - 2005-03-31
State v. John F. Giminski
basis for the instruction presents a question of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Dundon, 226
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3257 - 2005-03-31
basis for the instruction presents a question of law, which we review de novo. See State v. Dundon, 226
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3257 - 2005-03-31