Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23681 - 23690 of 58445 for speedy trial.

[PDF] Raymond Bier v. Mike Wicks
dismissing his negligence action in small claims court against Mike Wicks. The trial court concluded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10299 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] Appeal No. 2008AP2595 Cir. Ct. No. 2008CV737
the trial court err if it refuses to grant the insurance company’s motion to bifurcate the issues
/ca/cert/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=45005 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] State v. Michael J. Arpke
while this action was awaiting trial. On appeal, Arpke contends that this amendment violated his
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2868 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS
verdict, that her lawyer was ineffective or that the trial court erred in denying her postconviction
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=72316 - 2011-10-18

COURT OF APPEALS
motion in which he alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel. He argues: (1) the court improperly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=80965 - 2012-04-16

State v. David Krause
was acting in self-defense. Krause argues, and the State agrees, that the trial court improperly instructed
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6562 - 2014-02-11

State v. Jeffrey S. Tennant
of Tennant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt by the probative and credible evidence presented at trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13985 - 2005-03-31

Gene Frederickson Trucking, Inc. v. Fox River Fiber Management Corporation
that the agreement provided for a term of service. In granting Fox River’s motion, the trial court concluded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14027 - 2005-03-31

Neal D. Loehrke v. Matt Praxmarer
quoted. Praxmarer refused to pay the additional cost, and Loehrke instituted this action. The trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25624 - 2006-06-21

State v. Paul L. Bathe
imprisonment. He contends that the trial court did not state adequate justification for imposing the maximum
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=10032 - 2005-03-31