Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 35991 - 36000 of 68236 for law.

COURT OF APPEALS
of counsel claims are “limited to situations where the law or duty is clear such that reasonable counsel
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=29782 - 2007-07-23

COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED November 22, 2006 Cornelia G. Clark Clerk of Court of ...
for the instant charges. We agree. ¶5 Interpretation of the double jeopardy clause is an issue of law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=27228 - 2006-11-21

[PDF] William Ellingsworth v. Frederick Swiggum
of law, which this court reviews de novo without deference to the trial court's determination. Tahtinen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=7954 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] CA Blank Order
Rd. Milwaukee, WI 53226 Gregory Bates Bates Law Offices P.O. Box 70 Kenosha, WI 53141
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=112086 - 2017-09-21

COURT OF APPEALS
is incredible as a matter of law. See Johnson, 95 Wis. 2d at 151-52. As long as there is sufficient evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33536 - 2008-07-29

[PDF] CA Blank Order
. The sentence that the circuit court imposed was well within the limits of the maximum sentence allowed by law
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=362377 - 2021-05-04

[PDF] State v. Robert W. Sweat
No. 95-1975-CR -3- the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law, and, using
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=9391 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] State v. Kenneth W. Mickelson
court's findings of fact pass statutory or constitutional muster is a question of law that this court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2870 - 2017-09-19

Roberta K. Long v. Russell S. Long
determinations if it finds that the trial court examined the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8136 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
a question of law that we review de novo. Dane County DHS v. Ponn P., 2005 WI 32, ¶14, 279 Wis. 2d 169, 694
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=64232 - 2011-05-17