Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 30721 - 30730 of 58506 for speedy trial.
Search results 30721 - 30730 of 58506 for speedy trial.
[PDF]
CA Blank Order
appeals a judgment convicting him, after a jury trial, of several felonies. [R.45] Attorney Paul
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=114369 - 2017-09-21
appeals a judgment convicting him, after a jury trial, of several felonies. [R.45] Attorney Paul
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=114369 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
Mary Jane M. v. Milwaukee County
daughter, Mary K.M. Mary Jane contends that the trial court erred in dismissing her petition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26501 - 2017-09-21
daughter, Mary K.M. Mary Jane contends that the trial court erred in dismissing her petition
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=26501 - 2017-09-21
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
for a jury of six in chapter 51 trials, while a person whose commitment is sought under WIS. STAT. ch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87624 - 2017-09-21
for a jury of six in chapter 51 trials, while a person whose commitment is sought under WIS. STAT. ch
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=87624 - 2017-09-21
State v. Paul Hanson
under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). He also asserts that the trial court erred by concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2438 - 2005-03-31
under Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). He also asserts that the trial court erred by concluding
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=2438 - 2005-03-31
State v. Thomas B. Brulport
burst.[1] Testimony at the trial described this device as a “MacGyver bomb.” Brulport purchased
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9228 - 2005-03-31
burst.[1] Testimony at the trial described this device as a “MacGyver bomb.” Brulport purchased
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=9228 - 2005-03-31
State v. Jeremy G. Squires
for the repeater penalty enhancement. We conclude that the trial court correctly ruled that the allegations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11714 - 2005-03-31
for the repeater penalty enhancement. We conclude that the trial court correctly ruled that the allegations
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=11714 - 2005-03-31
[PDF]
COURT OF APPEALS
, which the court denied. The case proceeded to trial, and a jury convicted Shriver of the charged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109461 - 2017-09-21
, which the court denied. The case proceeded to trial, and a jury convicted Shriver of the charged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=109461 - 2017-09-21
COURT OF APPEALS
); and (3) a hearing to explore his allegation that the State’s failure to produce the reports before trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111905 - 2014-05-12
); and (3) a hearing to explore his allegation that the State’s failure to produce the reports before trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=111905 - 2014-05-12
COURT OF APPEALS
presented at his jury trial. Mayer also argues “plain error” occurred when the prosecutor engaged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=122306 - 2014-09-23
presented at his jury trial. Mayer also argues “plain error” occurred when the prosecutor engaged
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=122306 - 2014-09-23
[PDF]
James M. Gibson v. Overnite Transportation Company
a former employee; (3) the punitive damages are excessive; and (4) the trial court erred by not requiring
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5928 - 2017-09-19
a former employee; (3) the punitive damages are excessive; and (4) the trial court erred by not requiring
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=5928 - 2017-09-19