Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 27581 - 27590 of 30191 for de.
Search results 27581 - 27590 of 30191 for de.
[PDF]
WI App 147
confirmation of the accuracy of what he told the officers was de minimis—the jury would have still heard what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72631 - 2014-09-15
confirmation of the accuracy of what he told the officers was de minimis—the jury would have still heard what
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=72631 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Jeannie M. P.
, but whether counsel’s performance was deficient or prejudicial are legal questions we decide de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18686 - 2017-09-21
, but whether counsel’s performance was deficient or prejudicial are legal questions we decide de novo. See
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18686 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is a question of law this court reviews de novo. Id. A.P. must satisfy both prongs—deficiency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=760588 - 2024-02-07
is a question of law this court reviews de novo. Id. A.P. must satisfy both prongs—deficiency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=760588 - 2024-02-07
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of law that we review de novo. State v. Trawitzki, 2001 WI 77, ¶19, 244 Wis. 2d 523, 628 N.W.2d 801
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1080291 - 2026-02-19
of law that we review de novo. State v. Trawitzki, 2001 WI 77, ¶19, 244 Wis. 2d 523, 628 N.W.2d 801
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1080291 - 2026-02-19
State v. Dean Garfoot
(1985). Our review of the trial court's ruling is therefore de novo. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7956 - 2005-03-31
(1985). Our review of the trial court's ruling is therefore de novo. We
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7956 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
¶12 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=106766 - 2014-01-13
¶12 We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, using the same methodology as the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=106766 - 2014-01-13
State v. Robert L. Von Haden, Jr.
which we decide de novo. Id. Whether a new factor justifies sentence modification, however, presents
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7060 - 2005-03-31
which we decide de novo. Id. Whether a new factor justifies sentence modification, however, presents
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=7060 - 2005-03-31
State v. George C. Lohmeier
). This is a question of constitutional fact, which we review de novo. See id. at 296. In addition, in cases involving
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16941 - 2005-03-31
). This is a question of constitutional fact, which we review de novo. See id. at 296. In addition, in cases involving
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=16941 - 2005-03-31
Judy Hartman v. Winnebago County
is a matter of law which we review de novo, benefitting from the analyses of the circuit court and the court
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17094 - 2005-03-31
is a matter of law which we review de novo, benefitting from the analyses of the circuit court and the court
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17094 - 2005-03-31
Frontsheet
there is sufficient evidence to support a bindover is a question of law subject to de novo review. See Williams, 104
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117785 - 2014-07-22
there is sufficient evidence to support a bindover is a question of law subject to de novo review. See Williams, 104
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=117785 - 2014-07-22