Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25851 - 25860 of 29810 for des.
Search results 25851 - 25860 of 29810 for des.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
source omitted). The determination of counsel’s effectiveness is a question of law which we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190894 - 2017-09-21
source omitted). The determination of counsel’s effectiveness is a question of law which we review de
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=190894 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
performance was deficient or prejudiced the defense are questions of law for de novo review. Id. ¶20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74929 - 2011-12-07
performance was deficient or prejudiced the defense are questions of law for de novo review. Id. ¶20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=74929 - 2011-12-07
Clarence C. Joseph v. Gary R. McCaughtry
. Review by certiorari is not a de novo inquiry. Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84 Wis.2d 57, 64, 267 N.W.2d 17, 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12273 - 2005-03-31
. Review by certiorari is not a de novo inquiry. Van Ermen v. DHSS, 84 Wis.2d 57, 64, 267 N.W.2d 17, 20
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12273 - 2005-03-31
Jerry Teague v. Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians
is a question of law, also subject to a de novo standard of review. See id. While we appreciate and consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14869 - 2005-03-31
is a question of law, also subject to a de novo standard of review. See id. While we appreciate and consider
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14869 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
.”). We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard. Kerkvliet v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71741 - 2011-10-03
.”). We review de novo whether the trial court has applied the correct legal standard. Kerkvliet v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=71741 - 2011-10-03
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
are to be reviewed “under the same standard we apply to a [trial] court’s conclusions of law—de novo.” Id., ¶84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218405 - 2018-09-05
are to be reviewed “under the same standard we apply to a [trial] court’s conclusions of law—de novo.” Id., ¶84
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218405 - 2018-09-05
COURT OF APPEALS
decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit court. Frost v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97753 - 2013-06-04
decisions de novo, applying the same methodology and legal standard employed by the circuit court. Frost v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=97753 - 2013-06-04
[PDF]
WI APP 4
judgment, we apply the same standard as the circuit court and our review is de novo.3 Green Spring Farms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31069 - 2014-09-15
judgment, we apply the same standard as the circuit court and our review is de novo.3 Green Spring Farms
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=31069 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
review de novo; for example, whether the court exceeded its “clarifying” function and improperly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=255598 - 2020-03-03
review de novo; for example, whether the court exceeded its “clarifying” function and improperly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=255598 - 2020-03-03
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, reasonable suspicion—is de novo. State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 143, ¶6, 275 Wis. 2d 456, 685 N.W.2d 869
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=226507 - 2018-11-07
, reasonable suspicion—is de novo. State v. Powers, 2004 WI App 143, ¶6, 275 Wis. 2d 456, 685 N.W.2d 869
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=226507 - 2018-11-07