Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 5531 - 5540 of 6659 for mix.

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
id. at 697. ¶12 The issues of performance and prejudice present mixed questions of fact and law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=96736 - 2014-09-15

COURT OF APPEALS
review the denial of an ineffective assistance claim as a mixed question of fact and law. State v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=51734 - 2010-07-06

[PDF] NOTICE
, the trial court wrote: The Court’s findings of fact and mixed findings of fact and conclusions of law
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=32111 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] United Parcel Service, Inc. v. James Lust
stress.” This argument mixes apples and oranges. LIRC was speaking of Lust's claim for mental injury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10247 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] State v. Walter Leutenegger
into a home is justified by the exigent circumstances exception is a mixed question of fact and law. Id
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=6066 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
that there was fentanyl “attached” to the mix of cocaine and heroin. The State argued that it was an aggravating
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=270199 - 2020-07-21

[PDF] NOTICE
under WIS. STAT. § 974.06 without a hearing under a mixed standard of review. State v. Love, 2005 WI
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30405 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
assistance of counsel is a mixed question of law and fact. The circuit court’s findings of fact
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=186160 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Leane Teriaca v. Milwaukee Employes' Retirement System/Annuity and Pension Board
. That is, the decision addressed a mixed question of fact and law. This court does not have the opportunity to review
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5689 - 2017-09-19

State v. Edward L. Riley
actions constitute ineffective assistance is a mixed question of law and fact. State ex rel. Flores v
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13903 - 2005-03-31