Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 28721 - 28730 of 58285 for speedy trial.
Search results 28721 - 28730 of 58285 for speedy trial.
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
jurisdiction over his case due to irregularities in the way that his case was commenced; whether his trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218915 - 2018-09-19
jurisdiction over his case due to irregularities in the way that his case was commenced; whether his trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=218915 - 2018-09-19
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, the defense indicated that it would proceed to trial. On the date of trial, February 10, 2016, the State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193099 - 2017-09-21
, the defense indicated that it would proceed to trial. On the date of trial, February 10, 2016, the State
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=193099 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
counsel should have challenged his trial attorneys’ failure to properly investigate a coercion defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60508 - 2011-02-28
counsel should have challenged his trial attorneys’ failure to properly investigate a coercion defense
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=60508 - 2011-02-28
State v. Bryan Gary
) the State breached the plea agreement; and (3) trial counsel was ineffective. We conclude the plea
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19309 - 2005-08-15
) the State breached the plea agreement; and (3) trial counsel was ineffective. We conclude the plea
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=19309 - 2005-08-15
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
) that the circuit court misused its discretion in admitting evidence at trial; (5) that the circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=88254 - 2014-09-15
) that the circuit court misused its discretion in admitting evidence at trial; (5) that the circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=88254 - 2014-09-15
James Merkel v. Village of Germantown
). The trial court did not consider the issue raised in the certiorari petition—whether the land area
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13273 - 2005-03-31
). The trial court did not consider the issue raised in the certiorari petition—whether the land area
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13273 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
the trial court erred by denying his motion in limine to exclude evidence. We reject Shong’s arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92478 - 2014-09-15
the trial court erred by denying his motion in limine to exclude evidence. We reject Shong’s arguments
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=92478 - 2014-09-15
COURT OF APPEALS
) that the circuit court misused its discretion in admitting evidence at trial; (5) that the circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88254 - 2012-10-15
) that the circuit court misused its discretion in admitting evidence at trial; (5) that the circuit court should
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=88254 - 2012-10-15
State v. Bradley D. Muck
of 0.10 or more, second offense, contrary to § 346.63(1)(b). Muck argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6262 - 2005-03-31
of 0.10 or more, second offense, contrary to § 346.63(1)(b). Muck argues that the trial court erred
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6262 - 2005-03-31
COURT OF APPEALS
), third offense. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33305 - 2008-07-08
), third offense. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence because
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=33305 - 2008-07-08