Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35681 - 35690 of 57315 for id.
Search results 35681 - 35690 of 57315 for id.
[PDF]
State v. James Hill
of which the defendant complains. Id., 119 Wis. 2d at 622–623, 350 N.W.2d at 638–639. ¶22 The primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14070 - 2014-09-15
of which the defendant complains. Id., 119 Wis. 2d at 622–623, 350 N.W.2d at 638–639. ¶22 The primary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14070 - 2014-09-15
2007 WI APP 41
to disregard the plain, clear words of the statute.” Id., ¶46 (citation omitted). [A] statute is ambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28014 - 2007-03-27
to disregard the plain, clear words of the statute.” Id., ¶46 (citation omitted). [A] statute is ambiguous
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28014 - 2007-03-27
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
a decision not reasonably supported by the facts of record.” Id. (Citation omitted.) ¶11 Pitzka first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=973500 - 2025-06-25
a decision not reasonably supported by the facts of record.” Id. (Citation omitted.) ¶11 Pitzka first
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=973500 - 2025-06-25
COURT OF APPEALS
demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient. Id.; State v. McDowell, 2004 WI 70, ¶49, 272 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36152 - 2013-09-11
demonstrate that counsel’s performance was deficient. Id.; State v. McDowell, 2004 WI 70, ¶49, 272 Wis. 2d
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36152 - 2013-09-11
COURT OF APPEALS
fact exist. Id. “In evaluating the evidence, we draw all reasonable inferences from the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33820 - 2008-08-26
fact exist. Id. “In evaluating the evidence, we draw all reasonable inferences from the evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33820 - 2008-08-26
COURT OF APPEALS
the statute. See id.; P.P., 279 Wis. 2d 169, ¶¶16-17. “[G]iven a choice of reasonable interpretations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30150 - 2007-09-04
the statute. See id.; P.P., 279 Wis. 2d 169, ¶¶16-17. “[G]iven a choice of reasonable interpretations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30150 - 2007-09-04
[PDF]
Supreme Court rule petition memo 17-03
, a court of appeals, a circuit court ....”); Id. § 3(1) (“The supreme court shall have superintending
/supreme/docs/1703memo.pdf - 2017-03-17
, a court of appeals, a circuit court ....”); Id. § 3(1) (“The supreme court shall have superintending
/supreme/docs/1703memo.pdf - 2017-03-17
State v. Randy J. Lechner
no deference to the circuit court's decisions. See id.; State v. Harris, 161 Wis. 2d 758, 760, 469 N.W.2d 207
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17163 - 2005-03-31
no deference to the circuit court's decisions. See id.; State v. Harris, 161 Wis. 2d 758, 760, 469 N.W.2d 207
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=17163 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Randy J. Lechner
no deference to the circuit court's No. 96-2830-CR 7 decisions. See id.; State v. Harris, 161 Wis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17163 - 2017-09-21
no deference to the circuit court's No. 96-2830-CR 7 decisions. See id.; State v. Harris, 161 Wis
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17163 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
relinquishment or abandonment of a known right. Id., ¶29. Although CPC quotes from case law speaking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92280 - 2014-09-15
relinquishment or abandonment of a known right. Id., ¶29. Although CPC quotes from case law speaking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92280 - 2014-09-15