Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 26901 - 26910 of 46075 for paternity test paper work.

[PDF] State v. Billy D. Evans
determining whether a seizure occurred, courts apply a reasonable person test: if a reasonable person would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12859 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Charles L., Sr.
was served with the petition in prison, DNA testing was conducted. The tests proved that Charles
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=19042 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Timothy M. F.
conclude that it was harmless. The test for harmless error is whether there is a reasonable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7264 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] Milwaukee Teachers' Education Association v. Milwaukee Board of School Directors
requires application of the balancing of interests tests set forth in our case law. See Newspapers, Inc
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=12031 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] NOTICE
driving to his apartment. Deckert then administered field sobriety tests and a preliminary breath test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=41943 - 2014-09-15

State v. Michael Marks
with prejudice under the test set forth in State v. Davis, 2001 WI 136, 248 Wis. 2d 986, 637 N.W.2d 62. He
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6725 - 2005-03-31

Halquist Stone Company, Inc. v. Town of Brothertown Planning and Zoning Committee
test to determine whether the evidence is sufficient. See Clark, 186 Wis.2d at 304, 519 N.W.2d at 784
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=12029 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Michael L. Kearney
, and that the tests he performed on Kearney revealed no evidence that Kearney suffered from any sexual
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15010 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
The prejudice prong of the Strickland test is satisfied where the attorney’s error is of such magnitude
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=52099 - 2010-07-14

[PDF] WI APP 134
significant way.” Miranda, 384 U.S. at 444. The test for custody is objective. The court asks whether
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=53555 - 2014-09-15