Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 241 - 250 of 612 for elms.

COURT OF APPEALS
was constitutionally adequate in both instances. We therefore need not address prejudice. See State v. Elm, 201 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=146989 - 2015-08-24

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
not address prejudice. See State v. Elm, 201 Wis. 2d 452, 462, 549 N.W.2d 471 (Ct. App. 1996). I. Dr
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=146989 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] CA Blank Order
N.W.2d 93 (“Trial strategy is afforded the presumption of constitutional adequacy.”); State v. Elm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1035873 - 2025-11-11

[PDF] NOTICE
in the face of alternatives that have been weighed by trial counsel. State v. Elm, 201 Wis. 2d 452, 464
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=33123 - 2014-09-15

WI App 3 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2012AP2103-CR Complete Title ...
to follow fundamental statutory requirements, see Village of Elm Grove v. Brefka, 2013 WI 54, ¶¶16, 18, 348
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=105741 - 2014-01-28

COURT OF APPEALS
in the face of alternatives that have been weighed by trial counsel. State v. Elm, 201 Wis. 2d 452, 464, 549
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33123 - 2008-06-24

[PDF] CA Blank Order
N.W.2d 93 (“Trial strategy is afforded the presumption of constitutional adequacy.”); State v. Elm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1035873 - 2025-11-11

State v. Roger H. Splitt
.” State v. Elm, 201 Wis. 2d 452, 464-65, 549 N.W.2d 471 (Ct. App. 1996) (citations omitted). ¶5
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3073 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] FICE OF THE CLERK
of professional judgment in the face of alternatives that have been weighed by … counsel.’” See State v. Elm
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=98819 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] WI APP 3
competency due to the failure to follow fundamental statutory requirements, see Village of Elm Grove v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=105741 - 2017-09-21