Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 25121 - 25130 of 41929 for jury duty/1000.
Search results 25121 - 25130 of 41929 for jury duty/1000.
State v. Timothy T. Morgan
. PER CURIAM. Timothy T. Morgan appeals from the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8565 - 2005-03-31
. PER CURIAM. Timothy T. Morgan appeals from the judgment of conviction, following a jury trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8565 - 2005-03-31
State v. Norbert J. Maday
of the evidence for that of the jury. State v. Barksdale, 160 Wis.2d 284, 290, 466 N.W.2d 198, 201 (Ct. App. 1991
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8774 - 2005-03-31
of the evidence for that of the jury. State v. Barksdale, 160 Wis.2d 284, 290, 466 N.W.2d 198, 201 (Ct. App. 1991
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=8774 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
-CRNM 2 Dominique D. Bryant appeals a judgment entered after a jury convicted him
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249332 - 2019-10-30
-CRNM 2 Dominique D. Bryant appeals a judgment entered after a jury convicted him
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=249332 - 2019-10-30
[PDF]
NOTICE
and affirm the order. BACKGROUND ¶2 In May 2002, Russo was convicted upon a jury’s verdict of one count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49111 - 2014-09-15
and affirm the order. BACKGROUND ¶2 In May 2002, Russo was convicted upon a jury’s verdict of one count
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=49111 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
The matter was set for a jury trial on November 29, 2005. On the day before trial, Loren M. spoke to Dr
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30938 - 2014-09-15
The matter was set for a jury trial on November 29, 2005. On the day before trial, Loren M. spoke to Dr
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30938 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
, was outweighed by the fact that it was a waste of time and confusing. ¶5 A jury found that the grounds
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60957 - 2014-09-15
, was outweighed by the fact that it was a waste of time and confusing. ¶5 A jury found that the grounds
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=60957 - 2014-09-15
[PDF]
NOTICE
that this testimony was not admissible as an expert opinion because it would not assist the jury in determining
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30172 - 2014-09-15
that this testimony was not admissible as an expert opinion because it would not assist the jury in determining
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=30172 - 2014-09-15
State v. Martise D. Odems
would have “advised” the jury about which of the two versions they should believe. Because Anderson’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13974 - 2005-03-31
would have “advised” the jury about which of the two versions they should believe. Because Anderson’s
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13974 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
FICE OF THE CLERK
erratically. The State also played the officer’s squad cam video of the incident for the jury. In addition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=919441 - 2025-02-26
erratically. The State also played the officer’s squad cam video of the incident for the jury. In addition
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=919441 - 2025-02-26
COURT OF APPEALS
argues that this testimony was not admissible as an expert opinion because it would not assist the jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30172 - 2007-09-05
argues that this testimony was not admissible as an expert opinion because it would not assist the jury
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=30172 - 2007-09-05