Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 22331 - 22340 of 58506 for speedy trial.
Search results 22331 - 22340 of 58506 for speedy trial.
[PDF]
James A. Shives v. William L. Powell
. No. 00-1298 3 STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶6 Although we review a trial court's legal conclusions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2600 - 2017-09-19
. No. 00-1298 3 STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶6 Although we review a trial court's legal conclusions
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2600 - 2017-09-19
Liduvina Stensland v. Warshafsky
. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Liduvina Stensland appeals from the trial court’s summary judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3485 - 2005-03-31
. ¶1 PER CURIAM. Liduvina Stensland appeals from the trial court’s summary judgment
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=3485 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
State v. Michael C. Cull
in a one-year revocation, and contends that the trial court erred by finding that he refused the test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13225 - 2017-09-21
in a one-year revocation, and contends that the trial court erred by finding that he refused the test
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13225 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
NOTICE
of a child. He argues that the trial court erred in admitting a videotaped statement by the child
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44495 - 2014-09-15
of a child. He argues that the trial court erred in admitting a videotaped statement by the child
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=44495 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
State v. Gary D. Kluczynski
offense. Kluczynski argues that he was denied a fair trial because of judicial bias. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26066 - 2017-09-21
offense. Kluczynski argues that he was denied a fair trial because of judicial bias. We disagree
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26066 - 2017-09-21
State v. Daniel P. Moen
. § 346.63(1)(a) (1999-2000).[2] Moen claims that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
. § 346.63(1)(a) (1999-2000).[2] Moen claims that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4457 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
was pending. We affirm. ¶2 The facts are taken from affidavits and trial testimony. The west border
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115237 - 2017-09-21
was pending. We affirm. ¶2 The facts are taken from affidavits and trial testimony. The west border
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=115237 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Malcolm H. v. Marc J. Ackerman
Ackerman constituted a frivolous action. The appellants claim the trial court erred in: (1) granting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11441 - 2017-09-19
Ackerman constituted a frivolous action. The appellants claim the trial court erred in: (1) granting
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11441 - 2017-09-19
[PDF]
State v. Dexter Tolefree
jurisdiction; and that his trial counsel was ineffective. He submits that the above denied him his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10564 - 2017-09-20
jurisdiction; and that his trial counsel was ineffective. He submits that the above denied him his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10564 - 2017-09-20
COURT OF APPEALS
on during the plea process and the trial court failed to adequately set forth the elements of his offenses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35793 - 2009-03-09
on during the plea process and the trial court failed to adequately set forth the elements of his offenses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35793 - 2009-03-09