Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 38971 - 38980 of 46121 for paternity test paper work.

State v. Antoine Murphy
the jury to conclude that he intended to kill the victim. ¶4 The test on appeal for the sufficiency
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2595 - 2005-03-31

Cheryl Ellerman v. City of Manitowoc
the lot was “held out to the public,” the supreme court stated that the test was whether the person
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6134 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
offense. State v. Muentner, 138 Wis. 2d 374, 385, 406 N.W.2d 415 (1987). [7] The test for harmless
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=112660 - 2014-05-20

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
by substantial evidence in the record. Hedlund, 337 Wis. 2d 634, ¶21. “This test means that taking
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96858 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Cleveland Brown, Jr.
, the two-pronged test set forth in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), must be satisfied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10524 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] CA Blank Order
a positive COVID test. In support of that ruling, the court referenced the many delays in the case, which
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=821311 - 2024-07-02

Crystal R. Steinhart v. St. Paul Fire & Casualty Insurance
McKnight v. Johnson Controls, Inc., 36 F.3d 1396, 1409–1410 (1994) (“where the experimental tests do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11427 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Aaron S. Rothering v. Gary R. McCaughtry
it also appears that the remedy by motion is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11343 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). We need not address both aspects of the Strickland test if the defendant
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115772 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Frank P. Howard
and defends the proximity and accessibility test adopted by the Court of Appeals. We agree with petitioners
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=8790 - 2017-09-19