Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 23831 - 23840 of 58267 for speedy trial.

COURT OF APPEALS
. ¶1 FINE, J. Josiah Israel Seals appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=28839 - 2007-04-30

State v. Seth A. Foster
suppressing evidence seized from Seth Foster’s home. The trial court concluded that the warrantless search
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=25995 - 2006-07-24

[PDF] NOTICE
his plea on the grounds that his trial counsel was ineffective because he did not present a viable
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=29127 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] Ann Miller v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company
compliance. We reject these arguments and affirm the judgment. The trial court properly exercised its
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10397 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] State v. Treble Hworb Henderson
. We conclude that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying the motion and affirm
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=3031 - 2017-09-19

State v. William F.S.
that the trial court improperly exercised its discretion when it admitted the other acts evidence. We reject
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=14548 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Thomas C. Malin v. Randel D. Knipfer
across a portion of the Knipfers’ property. At the time of trial, the easement was a grass-covered
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4139 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] State v. William F.S.
adequate notice of the acts the State sought to admit. He also argues that the trial court improperly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=14548 - 2017-09-21

Donald E. Stoetzel v. City of New Berlin
. Donald E. Stoetzel appeals pro se from a judgment following a jury trial dismissing his action against
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8476 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Magdaleno D. Baca, Jr.
. STAT. § 971.31(10) (1999-2000), he challenges the trial court’s refusal to suppress two witnesses
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=4467 - 2017-09-19