Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 5421 - 5430 of 57351 for id.
Search results 5421 - 5430 of 57351 for id.
Kenosha County Department of Human Services v. Lucille S.
the reviewing court has confidence in the outcome of the proceeding. Id. at ¶28. For a procedural error
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3921 - 2005-03-31
the reviewing court has confidence in the outcome of the proceeding. Id. at ¶28. For a procedural error
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3921 - 2005-03-31
State v. David J. Arnold
, 584 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1998). We review with deference the trial court’s factual findings. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3862 - 2005-03-31
, 584 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1998). We review with deference the trial court’s factual findings. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3862 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
was inaccurate and that the court actually relied on the inaccurate information at sentencing. Id., ¶26
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=428413 - 2021-09-21
was inaccurate and that the court actually relied on the inaccurate information at sentencing. Id., ¶26
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=428413 - 2021-09-21
State v. Shawn E. Avery
deference to the trial court’s decision. Id. Nonetheless, we value a trial court’s decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4227 - 2005-03-31
deference to the trial court’s decision. Id. Nonetheless, we value a trial court’s decision
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4227 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
of law and fact. Id. at 633-34. Under this standard, we will not reverse the circuit court’s findings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=54420 - 2010-09-13
of law and fact. Id. at 633-34. Under this standard, we will not reverse the circuit court’s findings
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=54420 - 2010-09-13
State v. Jane A. Sliwinski
to the blood draw. Id., ¶6. Discussion ¶6 Sliwinski’s sole challenge to the reasonableness of the draw
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6015 - 2005-03-31
to the blood draw. Id., ¶6. Discussion ¶6 Sliwinski’s sole challenge to the reasonableness of the draw
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6015 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. David J. Arnold
, 584 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1998). We review with deference the trial court’s factual findings. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3862 - 2017-09-20
, 584 N.W.2d 553 (Ct. App. 1998). We review with deference the trial court’s factual findings. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3862 - 2017-09-20
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
suspicion that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed.” Id., ¶20
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244584 - 2019-07-31
suspicion that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed.” Id., ¶20
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=244584 - 2019-07-31
[PDF]
County of Iowa v. Brock T. Bilse
or violated a traffic statute. See id. The circumstances do not have to demonstrate proof beyond
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15435 - 2017-09-21
or violated a traffic statute. See id. The circumstances do not have to demonstrate proof beyond
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=15435 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
consistent with constitutional requirements is a question of law that we review de novo. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55300 - 2014-09-15
consistent with constitutional requirements is a question of law that we review de novo. See id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=55300 - 2014-09-15