Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 34751 - 34760 of 45816 for paternity test paper work.
Search results 34751 - 34760 of 45816 for paternity test paper work.
COURT OF APPEALS
argument does not identify or discuss the correct standard for the new factor test, but says only
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=54716 - 2010-09-22
argument does not identify or discuss the correct standard for the new factor test, but says only
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=54716 - 2010-09-22
COURT OF APPEALS
the evidence, that is not the test on appeal. Id., ¶29. We therefore uphold the trial court’s finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35552 - 2009-02-17
the evidence, that is not the test on appeal. Id., ¶29. We therefore uphold the trial court’s finding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35552 - 2009-02-17
State v. Christopher Butler
With respect to the “prejudice” component of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2974 - 2005-03-31
With respect to the “prejudice” component of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2974 - 2005-03-31
State v. Nels H. Rieth
assistance test. First, it is undisputed that one of the problematic jurors was excused for cause before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6186 - 2005-03-31
assistance test. First, it is undisputed that one of the problematic jurors was excused for cause before
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6186 - 2005-03-31
State v. Gary Rach
.2d at 891. The objective test is whether “a reasonably prudent [person] in the circumstances would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9860 - 2005-03-31
.2d at 891. The objective test is whether “a reasonably prudent [person] in the circumstances would
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9860 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED December 19, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
to overcome the learning problems, except that the child need not be evaluated if tests administered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27460 - 2006-12-18
to overcome the learning problems, except that the child need not be evaluated if tests administered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27460 - 2006-12-18
State v. Howard C. Carter
, ¶21, 237 Wis. 2d 591, 614 N.W.2d 11. We need not repeat the often-stated, two-part test of deficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4338 - 2005-03-31
, ¶21, 237 Wis. 2d 591, 614 N.W.2d 11. We need not repeat the often-stated, two-part test of deficient
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4338 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
). ¶14 In evaluating whether the presumption has been rebutted, we apply two tests, one subjective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=168269 - 2017-09-21
). ¶14 In evaluating whether the presumption has been rebutted, we apply two tests, one subjective
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=168269 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
not address the prejudice prong of the ineffectiveness test. See State v. Kimbrough, 2001 WI App 138, ¶26
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26907 - 2014-09-15
not address the prejudice prong of the ineffectiveness test. See State v. Kimbrough, 2001 WI App 138, ¶26
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26907 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what would a reasonable police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=201649 - 2017-11-09
is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what would a reasonable police
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=201649 - 2017-11-09