Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25651 - 25660 of 30059 for de.
Search results 25651 - 25660 of 30059 for de.
State v. Thermond Larry III
a challenge to a search warrant affidavit under Franks is a question of law that we review de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12992 - 2005-03-31
a challenge to a search warrant affidavit under Franks is a question of law that we review de novo. See State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12992 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
Frontsheet
of statutory interpretation. "Interpretation of a statute is a question of law that we review de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=593399 - 2022-11-22
of statutory interpretation. "Interpretation of a statute is a question of law that we review de novo
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=593399 - 2022-11-22
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, whether a set of facts constitutes probable cause is a question of law this court reviews de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=498044 - 2022-03-23
, whether a set of facts constitutes probable cause is a question of law this court reviews de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=498044 - 2022-03-23
[PDF]
Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Arik J. Guenther
are reviewed on a de novo basis. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14, ¶5, 269
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19061 - 2017-09-21
are reviewed on a de novo basis. See In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Eisenberg, 2004 WI 14, ¶5, 269
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19061 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED February 26, 2015 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of A...
interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo. Barritt v. Lowe, 2003 WI App 185, ¶6, 266 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135632 - 2015-02-25
interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo. Barritt v. Lowe, 2003 WI App 185, ¶6, 266 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=135632 - 2015-02-25
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
omitted). The ultimate determination of whether counsel was ineffective is a question we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=228649 - 2018-11-28
omitted). The ultimate determination of whether counsel was ineffective is a question we review de novo
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=228649 - 2018-11-28
Alice J. Heise v. Carl P. Heise
. § 805.17(2). We review questions of law de novo. See Michael A.P., 178 Wis. 2d at 148. ¶14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7402 - 2005-03-31
. § 805.17(2). We review questions of law de novo. See Michael A.P., 178 Wis. 2d at 148. ¶14
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7402 - 2005-03-31
State v. Angel Luis Rodriguez
the prejudice prong is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See id. ¶14 Having examined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3143 - 2005-03-31
the prejudice prong is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. See id. ¶14 Having examined
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3143 - 2005-03-31
Donald R. Kustelski v. Robin L. Taylor
judgment de novo using the same methodology as the circuit court. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5789 - 2005-03-31
judgment de novo using the same methodology as the circuit court. Green Spring Farms v. Kersten, 136 Wis
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=5789 - 2005-03-31
State v. Leland Jarvey
such slight effect as to be de minimus.” Id. In determining if harmless error exists, we focus on whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3729 - 2005-03-31
such slight effect as to be de minimus.” Id. In determining if harmless error exists, we focus on whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3729 - 2005-03-31