Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 62911 - 62920 of 68579 for law.

[PDF] State v. Randolph S. Miller
was inadequate under WIS. STAT. § 971.08 and Bangert is a question of law we decide de novo. State v. Hansen
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5563 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] William Jungbauer v. Polk County
. The interpretation of a statute is a question of law which we review de novo. State ex rel. Sielen v. Circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2789 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS
sounds coming from the Postons’ home. However, the Postons offer no case law to support the legal theory
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49541 - 2010-06-29

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
law and the standard of review ¶19 At the dispositional phase of a termination of parental rights
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=251711 - 2019-12-27

Carol Ann Schaidler v. Mercy Medical Center of Oshkosh, Inc.
there are no material facts in dispute, no competing inferences that can arise and the law that controls the issue
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10479 - 2014-06-18

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
pressure by law enforcement agents who questioned me. .... (11) I do re-call seeing Mr. David M
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=156190 - 2017-09-21

State v. William F. Williams
ineffective assistance of counsel is a question of mixed fact and law. See id. What the attorney did or did
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=15307 - 2005-03-31

State v. Leland Jarvey
for Cartier. At approximately 3 a.m., Mrs. Cartier contacted law enforcement and persuaded them to begin
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3729 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
, and case law, to which Washington replied: DEFENDANT: I have no problem with that. THE COURT: Well, do
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=94413 - 2013-03-25

State v. Sonniel R. Gidarisingh
to relief is a question of law to be reviewed independently by this court. See id. at 310, 548 N.W.2d at 53
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14165 - 2005-03-31