Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 38101 - 38110 of 46056 for paternity test paper work.
Search results 38101 - 38110 of 46056 for paternity test paper work.
[PDF]
State v. Dontae L. Doyle
of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must affirmatively prove that the alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4884 - 2017-09-19
of the test for ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must affirmatively prove that the alleged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4884 - 2017-09-19
COURT OF APPEALS
that the chemical test was performed and that this difference could have provided either a defense or a lesser
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82459 - 2012-05-15
that the chemical test was performed and that this difference could have provided either a defense or a lesser
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=82459 - 2012-05-15
State v. Gregory A. Allen
-pronged Strickland[3] test. State ex rel. Flores v. State, 183 Wis. 2d 587, 619-20, 516 N.W.2d 362 (1994
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2966 - 2005-03-31
-pronged Strickland[3] test. State ex rel. Flores v. State, 183 Wis. 2d 587, 619-20, 516 N.W.2d 362 (1994
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2966 - 2005-03-31
Dane County Department of Human Services v. P. P.
basis.” But that is not the test here. The well-settled standard applied to termination of parental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6873 - 2005-03-31
basis.” But that is not the test here. The well-settled standard applied to termination of parental
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6873 - 2005-03-31
Susan Malone v. Daniel G. Gaengel
teaches that this does not determine whether there is insurance coverage: “[T]he substantial factor test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13855 - 2005-03-31
teaches that this does not determine whether there is insurance coverage: “[T]he substantial factor test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13855 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
of the advocate, I’m satisfied that a zealous advocate would have an opportunity to proceed and test what he had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=685413 - 2023-08-02
of the advocate, I’m satisfied that a zealous advocate would have an opportunity to proceed and test what he had
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=685413 - 2023-08-02
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
de novo. See id. We need not address both elements of the test if the defendant fails to make
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=481776 - 2022-02-08
de novo. See id. We need not address both elements of the test if the defendant fails to make
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=481776 - 2022-02-08
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
a sufficient showing on one prong of the Strickland test, a reviewing court need not address the other. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1072834 - 2026-02-03
a sufficient showing on one prong of the Strickland test, a reviewing court need not address the other. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1072834 - 2026-02-03
COURT OF APPEALS
of reasonableness is a common sense test. The crucial question is whether the facts of the case would warrant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109118 - 2014-03-17
of reasonableness is a common sense test. The crucial question is whether the facts of the case would warrant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=109118 - 2014-03-17
COURT OF APPEALS
is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what would a reasonable police officer
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32802 - 2008-05-27
is a common sense test: under all the facts and circumstances present, what would a reasonable police officer
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=32802 - 2008-05-27