Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23331 - 23340 of 58506 for speedy trial.

State v. Brandon J. Matke
of an intoxicant (OMVWI) and imposed a sentence for sixth-offense OMVWI. He claims the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6804 - 2005-03-31

COURT OF APPEALS
that his trial counsel was ineffective, the circuit court erroneously exercised its sentencing discretion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87402 - 2012-09-24

WI App 137 court of appeals of wisconsin published opinion Case No.: 2013AP748 Complete Title of...
the purview of Wis. Stat. § 82.31(2)(a). In a series of orders culminating in a judgment, the trial court
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=103500 - 2013-11-19

[PDF] Bryan H. Larson v. Lisa M. Larson
of divorce. He argues that the trial court erroneously exercised its discretion because it (1) awarded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=18429 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] Van Slett Craftsmen, Inc. v. The C.W. Carlson Company, Inc.
Craftsmen, Inc. appeals the trial court's judgment dismissing its action against The C.W. Carlson Company
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10544 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
postconviction relief. Jones argues his trial counsel was ineffective for No. 2012AP1390-CR 2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=94485 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Michael S. Elkins v. Gary McCaughtry
the trial court’s denial of his motions for contempt and substitution of judge. The trial court dismissed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5279 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
. Hollenbeck contends his trial attorney was ineffective for failing to seek suppression of a witness’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=102152 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] State v. Susan M. Vetos
or her prosecution.” Id. at ¶20. The trial court denied Vetos’s motion after concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5431 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS
trial in the interest of justice. We reject Flowers’ arguments and affirm. BACKGROUND ¶2 Flowers
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72355 - 2011-10-17