Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 24161 - 24170 of 58492 for speedy trial.

[PDF] James Komarek v. Wisconsin Valley Improvement Co., Inc.
They argue that the trial court erroneously applied the doctrine of issue preclusion and improperly
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2609 - 2017-09-19

COURT OF APPEALS
. The court bound McCants over for trial, but agreed the hearing could be opened again if Pollard or another
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=36761 - 2009-06-10

[PDF] State v. Amado Saldana, Jr.
earlier because he was represented by the same counsel at trial and at the postconviction motion
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=2893 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
relevant to this appeal. We refer to Judge Barron as the trial court and Judge Brostrom as the circuit
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1013143 - 2025-09-23

[PDF] Brookhill Capital Resources, Inc. v. Jalensky Sports Center, Inc.
- The trial court granted partial summary judgment to Jalensky, Spiegelhoff and Carlson dismissing the CAM
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10453 - 2017-09-20

[PDF] CA Blank Order
Havas presided over Pederson’s jury trial and entered the judgment of conviction. The Honorable
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=575006 - 2022-10-11

[PDF] Kathleen Jensen v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund
"reprehensible" pretrial and trial conduct by the plaintiffs' attorney, who was licensed in Illinois
/sc/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=17557 - 2017-09-21

[PDF] COURT OF APPEALS
is entitled to withdraw his plea because trial counsel was ineffective for not seeking to suppress evidence
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=663723 - 2023-06-02

COURT OF APPEALS
to suppression of the evidence. ¶4 The trial court denied Ehret’s suppression motion after an evidentiary
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=49063 - 2010-04-20

James Komarek v. Wisconsin Valley Improvement Co., Inc.
in a thirty-foot strip of land bordering Lake Nokomis.[1] They argue that the trial court erroneously applied
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2609 - 2005-03-31