Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25181 - 25190 of 46126 for paternity test paper work.
Search results 25181 - 25190 of 46126 for paternity test paper work.
[PDF]
State v. Paul L. Minnig
, 505 N.W.2d 448 (Ct. App. 1993), another parking lot case, we established a test to determine when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7466 - 2017-09-20
, 505 N.W.2d 448 (Ct. App. 1993), another parking lot case, we established a test to determine when
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7466 - 2017-09-20
State v. Gregory M. Davis
constitutes reasonable suspicion is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11438 - 2005-03-31
constitutes reasonable suspicion is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11438 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
the objective-reasonable [person] test, with regard to the reasonableness of the actor’s beliefs that he [or she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96321 - 2013-05-06
the objective-reasonable [person] test, with regard to the reasonableness of the actor’s beliefs that he [or she
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=96321 - 2013-05-06
Janice Johnson Kuhn v. Charles V. James
court." Id. at 30, 218 N.W.2d at 357. Phifer concluded that "a balancing test is appropriate to review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10921 - 2005-03-31
court." Id. at 30, 218 N.W.2d at 357. Phifer concluded that "a balancing test is appropriate to review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10921 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
. The two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel claims requires defendants to prove: (1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35711 - 2009-03-02
. The two-pronged test for ineffective assistance of counsel claims requires defendants to prove: (1
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35711 - 2009-03-02
[PDF]
State v. Eugene A. Pagois
jury instructions enunciate a three- pronged test to determine whether a special defense jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9135 - 2017-09-19
jury instructions enunciate a three- pronged test to determine whether a special defense jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9135 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
that Jones did not sell her the drugs. No. 2015AP370-CR 7 test did not identify Jones
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=181976 - 2017-09-21
that Jones did not sell her the drugs. No. 2015AP370-CR 7 test did not identify Jones
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=181976 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Gamel S. Hegwood
is ultimately a legal determination, which this court decides de novo. Id. The test for ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5491 - 2017-09-19
is ultimately a legal determination, which this court decides de novo. Id. The test for ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5491 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Jeffrey A. Huck
not prove the prejudice prong of the Strickland test. This court also rejects Huck’s ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15521 - 2017-09-21
not prove the prejudice prong of the Strickland test. This court also rejects Huck’s ineffective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15521 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
State v. Jeremy J. Schlitt
). We now turn to the second prong in the Strickland test. The second prong asks whether “counsel’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9178 - 2017-09-19
). We now turn to the second prong in the Strickland test. The second prong asks whether “counsel’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9178 - 2017-09-19