Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 45021 - 45030 of 50524 for our.

[PDF] WI APP 66
and obligations may be established by our public records law. WISCONSIN STAT. § 19.35(1)(a) provides that “[e
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=726837 - 2024-01-18

COURT OF APPEALS
court should have weighed those factors differently. But our standard of review does not permit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=143972 - 2015-07-06

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
the comment bore a “reasonable nexus” to a proper sentencing factor. See id. (citation omitted). ¶42 Our
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=703564 - 2023-09-19

State v. Nathaniel Crampton
–559 (1996) (undertaking de novo analysis). On our de novo review, we believe that the State has met
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13383 - 2005-03-31

Frontsheet
-Davidson, Inc. v. Div. of Hearings & Appeals, 2006 WI 86, ¶13, 292 Wis. 2d 549, 717 N.W.2d 184. Our past
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35308 - 2009-01-22

[PDF] State v. Leo E. Wanta
is deeply rooted in our common law heritage, making competence to stand trial in a criminal proceeding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13586 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
standards ¶28 As our supreme court has explained, the United States Supreme Court has approved
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=683663 - 2023-07-27

[PDF]
, implicitly seeking its reversal at some point even though our supreme court denied a petition for review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=609512 - 2023-01-11

[PDF] State v. Arden C. Hirsch
, our standard of review is whether the evidence adduced, believed and rationally considered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3466 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] NOTICE
appeals. STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶19 Our review of an ineffective assistance claim presents a mixed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=50427 - 2014-09-15