Want to refine your search results? Try our advanced search.
Search results 31881 - 31890 of 58506 for speedy trial.

[PDF] Karen T. Runge v. Allstate Insurance Company
the purpose of § 631.43(1), STATS. The trial court ruled that it was not. We affirm. The facts
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=10126 - 2017-09-19

[PDF] CA Blank Order
. We stated that although trial courts must inform defendants of the direct consequences
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=124678 - 2017-09-21

Milwaukee County v. Jacqualine S. W.
by the trial court ordering commitment for six months, pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 51.42 or 51.437 (1999-2000),[2
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=4946 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] Frank C. Keller v. Michael S. Benning
the contract to indicate their intention to exercise their right of first refusal. The trial court concluded
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=13841 - 2014-09-15

[PDF] FICE OF THE CLERK
generally argued her trial counsel was ineffective, the charges lacked a factual basis, and her plea
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=1060062 - 2026-01-14

[PDF] CA Blank Order
the suppression motion. Borrmann requested a jury trial, but the trial date was substantially delayed by his
/ca/smd/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=689072 - 2023-08-15

COURT OF APPEALS
trial. ¶3 At sentencing, O’Neil made a statement seeking leniency for McAdoo. She also attempted
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=35796 - 2009-03-09

Langlade County Department of Human Services v. Ashleigh P.
A.S. appeals an order terminating his parental rights to his son, Tyler P. James argues the trial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=6006 - 2005-03-31

[PDF] State v. Clifford J. Lennie
% or more. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his "motion to suppress evidence based upon
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=11983 - 2017-09-21

State v. Serena M.T.
it admitted a videotape into evidence at Serena’s jury trial because the videotape was unfairly prejudicial
/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.html?content=html&seqNo=13815 - 2005-03-31