Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 30721 - 30730 of 58507 for speedy trial.
Search results 30721 - 30730 of 58507 for speedy trial.
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
COURT OF APPEALS
) is an unconstitutional violation of equal protection because it provides for a jury of six in chapter 51 trials, while
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87624 - 2013-11-25
) is an unconstitutional violation of equal protection because it provides for a jury of six in chapter 51 trials, while
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=87624 - 2013-11-25
COURT OF APPEALS
testified at his jury trial. Keith W., Zachary’s father, testified Zachary had been huffing gasoline
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=131025 - 2014-12-01
testified at his jury trial. Keith W., Zachary’s father, testified Zachary had been huffing gasoline
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=131025 - 2014-12-01
Village of Elm Grove v. Michael R. Johnson
. The following facts were established at Johnson’s trial in the municipal court. On August 17, 2001
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6080 - 2005-03-31
. The following facts were established at Johnson’s trial in the municipal court. On August 17, 2001
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6080 - 2005-03-31